Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Pregnancy eHealth and mHealth: user proportions and characteristics of pregnant women using Web-based information sources—a cross-sectional study

  • Maternal-Fetal Medicine
  • Published:
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To analyze the current proportions and characteristics of women using Internet (eHealth) and smartphone (mHealth) based sources of information during pregnancy and to investigate the influence, this information-seeking behavior has on decision-making.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted at two major German university hospitals. Questionnaires covering socio-demographic data, medical data and details of Internet, and smartphone application use were administered to 220 pregnant women. Data analysis utilized descriptive statistics and multiple regression analysis.

Results

50.7 % of pregnant women were online information seekers. 22.4 % used an mHealth pregnancy application. Women using eHealth information showed no specific profile, while women using mHealth applications proved to be younger, were more likely to be in their first pregnancy, felt less healthy, and were more likely to be influenced by the retrieved information. Stepwise backward regression analysis explained 25.8 % of the variance of mHealth use. 80.5 % of cases were classified correctly by the identified predictors. All types of Web-based information correlated significantly with decision-making during pregnancy.

Conclusions

Pregnant women frequently use the Internet and smartphone applications as a source of information. While Web usage was a common phenomenon, this study revealed specific characteristics of mHealth users during pregnancy. Improved, medically accurate smartphone applications might provide a way to specifically target the mHealth user group. As user influenceability was of major relevance to all types of information, all medical content should be carefully reviewed by a multidisciplinary board of medical specialists.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. McCann AD, McCulloch JE (2012) Establishing an online and social media presence for your IBCLC practice. J Hum Lact 28(4):450–454

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. European Travel Commission (2012) New media trend watch. http://www.newmediatrendwatch.com

  3. Lima-Pereira P, Bermúdez-Tamayo C, Jasienska G (2012) Use of the Internet as a source of health information amongst participants of antenatal classes. J Clin Nurs 21(3–4):322–330

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Lorence D, Park H (2006) Web-based consumer health information: public access, digital division, and remainders. MedGenMed 8(2):4

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Bert F, Gualano MR, Brusaferro S, de Vito E, de Waure C, La Torre G, Manzoli L, Messina G, Todros T, Torregrossa MV, Siliquini R (2013) Pregnancy e-health: a multicenter Italian cross-sectional study on internet use and decision-making among pregnant women. J Epidemiol Commun Health 67(12):1013–1018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bernhardt JM, Felter EM (2004) Online pediatric information seeking among mothers of young children: results from a qualitative study using focus groups. J Med Internet Res 6(1):e7

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Gao L, Larsson M, Luo S (2013) Internet use by Chinese women seeking pregnancy-related information. Midwifery 29(7):730–735

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Johnson SA (2015) ‘Intimate mothering publics’: comparing face-to-face support groups and internet use for women seeking information and advice in the transition to first-time motherhood. Cult Health Sex 17(2):237–251

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Tamrat T, Kachnowski S (2012) Special delivery: an analysis of mHealth in maternal and newborn health programs and their outcomes around the world. Matern Child Health J 16(5):1092–1101

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. World Health Organization (2011) mHealth: new horizons for health through mobile technologies. Global Observatory for eHealth series. vol 3. http://www.who.int/goe/publications/ehealth_series_vol3/en/

  11. Bert F, Passi S, Scaioli G, Gualano MR, Siliquini R (2015) There comes a baby! What should I do? Smartphones’ pregnancy-related applications: a web-based overview. Health Inform J. doi:10.1177/1460458215574120

    Google Scholar 

  12. Krieger T, Meyer B, Sude K, Urech A, Maercker A, Berger T (2014) Evaluating an e-mental health program (“deprexis”) as adjunctive treatment tool in psychotherapy for depression: design of a pragmatic randomized controlled trial. BMC Psychiatry 14:285

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Lupton D (2015) Health promotion in the digital era: a critical commentary. Health Promot Int 30(1):174–183

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lupton D, Jutel A (1982) ‘It’s like having a physician in your pocket!’ A critical analysis of self-diagnosis smartphone apps. Soc Sci Med 2015(133):128–135

    Google Scholar 

  15. Nyamtema AS, Urassa DP, van Roosmalen J (2011) Maternal health interventions in resource limited countries: a systematic review of packages, impacts and factors for change. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 11:30

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Mechael P, Nemser B, Cosmaciuc R, Cole-Lewis H, Ohemeng-Dapaah S, Dusabe S, Kaonga NN, Namakula P, Shemsanga M, Burbach R, Kanter AS (2012) Capitalizing on the characteristics of mHealth to evaluate its impact. J Health Commun 17(Suppl 1):62–66

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Bert F, Giacometti M, Gualano MR, Siliquini R (2014) Smartphones and health promotion: a review of the evidence. J Med Syst 38(1):9995

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Black AD, Car J, Pagliari C, Anandan C, Cresswell K, Bokun T, McKinstry B, Procter R, Majeed A, Sheikh A (2011) The impact of eHealth on the quality and safety of health care: a systematic overview. PLoS Med 8(1):e1000387

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Berland GK, Elliott MN, Morales LS, Algazy JI, Kravitz RL, Broder MS, Kanouse DE, Muñoz JA, Puyol JA, Lara M, Watkins KE, Yang H, McGlynn EA (2001) Health information on the internet: accessibility, quality, and readability in English and Spanish. JAMA 285(20):2612–2621

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Sinni SV, Cross WM, Swanson AE, Wallace EM (2016) Measuring pregnancy care: towards better maternal and child health. Austr N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 56(2):142–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Alcayaga C, Pérez JC, Bustamante C, Campos S, Lange I, Zuñiga F (2014) Plan piloto del sistema de comunicación y seguimiento móvil en salud para personas con diabetes (Pilot plan for a mobile health communication and monitoring system for people with diabetes). Rev Panam Salud Pública (Pan Am J Public Health) 35(5–6):458–464

    Google Scholar 

  22. Rodrigues R, Bogg L, Shet A, Kumar DS, de Costa A (2014) Mobile phones to support adherence to antiretroviral therapy: what would it cost the Indian National AIDS Control Programme? J Int AIDS Soc 17:19036

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Rezniczek GA, Küppers L, Heuer H, Hefler LA, Buerkle B, Tempfer CB (2015) Quality of websites of obstetrics and gynecology departments: a cross-sectional study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 15(1):103

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Jo Y, Labrique AB, Lefevre AE, Mehl G, Pfaff T, Walker N, Friberg IK (2014) Using the lives saved tool (LiST) to model mHealth impact on neonatal survival in resource-limited settings. PLoS One 9(7):e102224

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Abroms LC, Johnson PR, Heminger CL, Van Alstyne JM, Leavitt LE, Schindler-Ruwisch JM, Bushar JA (2015) Quit4baby: results from a pilot test of a mobile smoking cessation program for pregnant women. JMIR mHealth uHealth 3(1):e10. doi:10.2196/mhealth.3846

  26. BinDhim NF, Shaman AM, Trevena L, Basyouni MH, Pont LG, Alhawassi TM (2015) Depression screening via a smartphone app: cross-country user characteristics and feasibility. J Am Med Inform Assoc 22(1):29–34

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Dunford E, Trevena H, Goodsell C, Ng KH, Webster J, Millis A, Goldstein S, Hugueniot O, Neal B (2014) FoodSwitch: a mobile phone app to enable consumers to make healthier food choices and crowdsourcing of national food composition data. JMIR mHealth uHealth 2(3):e37

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Wallwiener M, Wallwiener CW, Kansy JK, Seeger H, Rajab TK (2009) Impact of electronic messaging on the patient–physician interaction. J Telemed Telecare 15(5):243–250

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Bauer AM, Rue T, Keppel GA, Cole AM, Baldwin L, Katon W (2014) Use of mobile health (mHealth) tools by primary care patients in the WWAMI region practice and research network (WPRN). J Am Board Fam Med JABFM 27(6):780–788

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Peragallo Urrutia R, Berger AA, Ivins AA, Beckham AJ, Thorp JM, Nicholson WK (2015) Internet use and access among pregnant women via computer and mobile phone: implications for delivery of perinatal care. JMIR mHealth uHealth 3(1):e25

  31. Fayers PM, Sprangers MA, Mirjam AG (2002) Understanding self-rated health. Lancet 359(9302):187–188

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Nahapiet J, Ghoshal S (1997) Social capital, intellectual capital and the organizational advantage: University of St. Andrews. Centre for Research into Industry, Enterprise, and the Firm, Castlecliffe

    Google Scholar 

  33. Bortz J, Weber R (2005) Statistik: Für Human- und Sozialwissenschaftler. Sechste, vollständig überarbeitete und aktualisierte Auflage. Springer, Berlin (ISBN 9783540264309)

  34. de Santis M, de Luca C, Quattrocchi T, Visconti D, Cesari E, Mappa I, Nobili E, Spagnuolo T, Caruso A (2010) Use of the internet by women seeking information about potentially teratogenic agents. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 151(2):154–157

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Kraschnewski JL, Chuang CH, Poole ES, Peyton T, Blubaugh I, Pauli J, Feher A, Reddy M (2014) Paging, “Dr. Google”: does technology fill the gap created by the prenatal care visit structure? Qualitative focus group study with pregnant women. J Med Internet Res 16(6):e147

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Lagan BM, Sinclair M, Kernohan WG (2010) Internet use in pregnancy informs women’s decision making: a web-based survey. Birth (Berkeley, Calif) 37(2):106–115

  37. Johnson SA (2014) Maternal devices”, social media and the self-management of pregnancy, mothering and child health. Societies 4:330–350. doi:10.3390/soc4020330

  38. Palosse-Cantaloube L, Lacroix I, Rousseau V, Bagheri H, Montastruc J, Damase-Michel C (2014) Analysis of chats on French internet forums about drugs and pregnancy. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 23(12):1330–1333

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Teoli DA, Zullig KJ, Hendryx MS (2015) Maternal fair/poor self-rated health and adverse infant birth outcomes. Health Care Women Int 36(1):108–120. doi:10.1080/07399332.2013.862796

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Morgan KJ, Eastwood JG (2014) Social determinants of maternal self-rated health in South Western Sydney, Australia. BMC Res Notes 7:51

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Statistisches Bundesamt (2014) Aktuelle Geburtenentwicklung. https://www.destatis.de/DE/ZahlenFakten/GesellschaftStaat/Bevoelkerung/Geburten/AktuellGeburtenentwicklung.html

Download references

Acknowledgments

Dr. Stephanie Wallwiener was financially supported by the German Society of Psychosomatic Gynaecology and Obstetrics.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 440, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany

    Stephanie Wallwiener, Anne Doster, Wolfgang Laserer & Markus Wallwiener

  2. Department of Psychology, Ludwig Maximilian University, Leopoldstr. 13, 80802, Munich, Germany

    Mitho Müller & Corinna Reck

  3. Department of Women’s Health, University of Tübingen, Calwerstr. 7, 72076, Tübingen, Germany

    Jan Pauluschke-Fröhlich, Sara Y. Brucker & Christian W. Wallwiener

Authors
  1. Stephanie Wallwiener
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mitho Müller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Anne Doster
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Wolfgang Laserer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Corinna Reck
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jan Pauluschke-Fröhlich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Sara Y. Brucker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Christian W. Wallwiener
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Markus Wallwiener
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephanie Wallwiener.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wallwiener, S., Müller, M., Doster, A. et al. Pregnancy eHealth and mHealth: user proportions and characteristics of pregnant women using Web-based information sources—a cross-sectional study. Arch Gynecol Obstet 294, 937–944 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-016-4093-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-016-4093-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation