Dataset Information

Experiences With a Postpartum mHealth Intervention During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Key Informant Interviews Among Patients, Health Care Providers, and Stakeholders.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Maternal morbidity and mortality in the United States continue to be a worsening public health crisis, with persistent racial disparities among Black women during the COVID-19 pandemic. Innovations in mobile health (mHealth) technology are being developed as a strategy to connect birthing women to their health care providers during the first 6 weeks of the postpartum period.

Objective

This study aimed to inform a process to evaluate the barriers to mHealth implementation in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic by exploring the experiences of mothers and stakeholders who were directly involved in the pilot program.

Methods

The qualitative design used GoToMeeting (GoTo) individual interviews of 13 mothers and 7 stakeholders at a suburban teaching hospital in New Jersey. Mothers were aged ≥18 years, able to read and write in English or Spanish, had a vaginal or cesarean birth at >20 weeks of estimated gestational age, and were admitted for delivery at the hospital with at least a 24-hour postpartum stay. Stakeholders were part of the hospital network's obstetrics collaborative subcommittee comprising administrators, physicians, registered nurses, and informatics. Responses were transcribed verbatim and analyzed for emerging themes. The socioecological framework provided a holistic lens for analyzing the multilevel influences on individual experiences.

Results

A total of 3 major themes were identified: mothers experienced barriers from personal situations at home and with services in the hospital and community, which were intensified by the COVID-19 pandemic; the COVID-19 pandemic negatively impacted hospital services, priorities, and individual staff; and mothers and stakeholders had positive experiences and perceptions of the mHealth intervention.

Conclusions

The use and reach of the mHealth intervention were negatively influenced by interrelated factors operating at multiple levels. The system-wide and multilevel impact of the pandemic was reflected in participants' responses, providing evidence for the need to re-evaluate mHealth implementation with more adaptable systems and structures in place using a socioecological framework.

SUBMITTER: Sadural E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9237765 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Health Technology Reassessment (HTR) is a structured, evidence-based assessment of the clinical, social, ethical and economic effects of a technology currently used in the health care system, to inform optimal use of that technology in comparison to its alternatives. Little is known about current international HTR practices. The objective of this research was to summarize experience-based information gathered from international experts on the development, initiation and implementation of a HTR program.A mixed methods approach, using a survey and in-depth interviews, was adopted. The survey covered 8 concepts: prioritization/identification of potentially obsolete technologies; program development; implementation; mitigation; program championing; stakeholder engagement; monitoring; and reinvestment. Members of Health Technology Assessment International (HTAi) and the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA) formed the sampling frame. Participation was solicited via email and the survey was administered online using SurveyMonkey. Survey results were analyzed using descriptive statistics. To gather more in-depth knowledge, semi-structured interviews were conducted among organizations with active HTR programs. Interview questions were developed using the same 8 concepts. The hour-long interviews were recorded, transcribed and analyzed using constant comparative analysis.Ninety-five individuals responded to the survey: 49 were not discussing HTR, 21 were beginning to discuss HTR, nine were imminently developing a program, and 16 participants had programs and were completing reassessments. The survey results revealed that methods vary widely and that although HTR is a powerful tool, it is currently not being used to its full potential. Of the 16 with active programs, nine agreed to participate in follow-up interviews. Interview participants identified early and extensive stakeholder engagement as the most important factors for success. A lack of top-down support and financial and human resources are inhibiting program development.HTR is in its infancy. Although HTRs are being conducted, there are no standardized approaches. However, much can be learned from current international work. Future work should focus on developing a comprehensive methodology, reporting the processes of reassessments and sharing successes and challenges in a common platform.

Project description:This paper sought to understand the extent to which, and how individuals use personal or collective language when asked to articulate sense of place from a collective perspective. Understanding a collective sense of place could illuminate place-based connections in natural resource industries, where it is as groups or as institutions that organizations interact with the environment rather than as individuals. While there are well known methods for collecting information about sense of place at the individual level, there is a gap in understanding the best method to collect information at a collective level. We examined the use of key-informant interviews as a method to understand collective sense of place. In Bocas del Toro, Panama, ecotourism and environmentally based organizations are becoming more prolific due to abundant natural resources, making it an interesting case study for understanding sense of place from an organizational perspective. The use of personal and collective language is examined though in-depth semi-structured interviews from 15 environmentally-oriented organizations with a total of 17 interviews. This study specifically examined whether and how key informants, when prompted to speak for their organization, spoke collectively, reflecting a collective perspective versus their own. Methods included both quantitative analysis of personal versus collective language use frequency, and qualitative examinations of how individuals used personal versus collective language. Our results indicated no difference in the frequency with which individuals use personal versus collective language. We found that how individuals situated their perspectives into an organization reflects a complex personal and collective point of view reflecting five themes of personal versus collective language use: 1) sole personal perspective, 2) sole collective perspective, 3) distinction between collective and personal perspective; 4) organization perspective with insertion of "I think"; and 5) personal and collective perspective about organization and greater community. Our research identifies a previously undiscussed potential bias of key informant interviews. These findings have implications for how researchers approach collecting information beyond the individual level.

Project description:BackgroundThe National Health Service diabetes prevention programme in England, (NHS DPP) aims to identify people at high risk of type 2 diabetes (T2D) and offer them a face-to-face, group-based, behaviour change intervention for at least 9 months. The NHS DPP was rolled out in phases. We aimed to elicit stakeholders' perceptions and experiences of the factors influencing implementation of, and participation in, the programme during the development phase.MethodsIndividual, semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 50 purposively sampled stakeholders: service users (n =?20); programme commissioners (n =?7); referrers (n =?8); and intervention deliverers (n =?15). Topic guides were structured using a pragmatic, theory-informed approach. Analysis employed the framework method.ResultsWe identified factors that influenced participation: Risk communication at referral - stakeholders identified point of referral as a window of opportunity to offer brief advice, to provide an understanding of T2D risk and information about the programme; Perceived impact of the NHS DPP - service users highlighted the positive perceived impact on their behaviour change, the peer support provided by participating in the programme, the option to involve a relative, and the 'knock on' effect on others. Service users also voiced disappointment when blood test results still identified them at high risk after the programme; and Behavioural maintenance - participants highlighted the challenges linked to behavioural maintenance (e.g. discontinuation of active support). Factors influencing implementations were also identified: Case finding - stakeholders suggested that using community involvement to identify service users could increase reach and ensure that the workload was not solely on GP practices; Adaptability: intervention deliverers acknowledged the need to tailor advice to service users' preferences and needs; Accountability - the need to acknowledge who was responsible for what at different stages of the NHS DPP pathway; and Fidelity - stakeholders described procedures involved in monitoring service users' satisfaction, outcome data collection and quality assurance assessments.ConclusionsThe NHS DPP offers an evidence-informed behavioural intervention for T2D prevention. Better risk communication specification could ensure consistency at the referral stage and improve participation in the NHS DPP intervention. Cultural adaptations and outreach strategies could ensure the NHS DPP contributes to reducing health inequalities.