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:ObjectiveTo explore the impact of the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on the quality of medical products in Zimbabwe, including market risks for substandard and falsified products and impacts on quality assurance activities.DesignQualitative study based on in-depth key informant interviews.SettingHealth system stakeholders across the medical product supply chain in Zimbabwe.Participants36 key informants were interviewed between April and June 2021.ResultsWe found that the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted quality assurance and regulatory activities of medical products in Zimbabwe, resulted in observations of poor-quality personal protective equipment (PPE) and other COVID-19-related products and led to increased risks to quality. Risks to quality due to COVID-19-related disruptions included increased layers of agents in the supply chain and an influx of non-traditional suppliers. COVID-19-related movement restrictions reduced access to health facilities and thus may have increased the usage of the informal market where smuggled and unregistered medical products are sold with less oversight by the regulator. Most reports of poor-quality medical products were for PPE, such as masks and infrared thermometers, used for the COVID-19 response. Besides these reports, many participants stated that the quality of essential medicines in the formal sector, not related to COVID-19, had largely been maintained during the pandemic due to the regulator's stringent quality assurance process. Incentives for suppliers to maintain quality to retain large donor-funded contracts, and the need for local wholesalers and distributors to comply with quality-related aspects of distribution agreements with global manufacturers of brand-name medical products, mitigated threats to quality.ConclusionsThe COVID-19 pandemic presented opportunities and market risks for circulation of substandard and falsified medical products in Zimbabwe. There is a need for policymakers to invest in measures to safeguard the quality of medical products during emergencies and to build resiliency against future supply chain shocks.

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:BackgroundThere is pressing need to improve hospital-based addiction care. Various models for integrating substance use disorder care into hospital settings exist, but there is no framework for describing, selecting, or comparing models. We sought to fill that gap by constructing a taxonomy of hospital-based addiction care models based on scoping literature review and key informant interviews.MethodsMethods included a scoping review of the literature on US hospital-based addiction care models and interventions for adults, published between January 2000 and July 2021. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 15 key informants experienced in leading, implementing, evaluating, andpracticing hospital-based addiction care to explore model characteristics, including their perceived strengths, limitations, and implementation considerations. We synthesized findings from the literature review and interviews to construct a taxonomy of model types.ResultsSearches identified 2,849 unique abstracts. Of these, we reviewed 280 full text articles, of which 76 were included in the final review. We added 8 references from reference lists and informant interviews, and 4 gray literature sources. We identified six distinct hospital-based addiction care models. Those classified as addiction consult models include (1) interprofessional addiction consult services, (2) psychiatry consult liaison services, and (3) individual consultant models. Those classified as practice-based models, wherein general hospital staff integrate addiction care into usual practice, include (4) hospital-based opioid treatment and (5) hospital-based alcohol treatment. The final type was (6) community-based in-reach, wherein community providers deliver care. Models vary in their target patient population, staffing, and core clinical and systems change activities. Limitations include that some models have overlapping characteristics and variable ways of delivering core components.DiscussionA taxonomy provides hospital clinicians and administrators, researchers, and policy-makers with a framework to describe, compare, and select models for implementing hospital-based addiction care and measure outcomes.