TY - JOUR AU - Lanssens, Dorien AU - Thijs, Inge M AU - Dreesen, Pauline AU - Van Hecke, Ann AU - corevits, Pascal AU - Gaethofs, Gitte AU - Derycke, Joyce AU - Tency, Inge PY - 2022 DA - 2022/10/11 TI -佛兰德孕妇信息资源:横断面研究乔- Res JMIR形式SP - e37866六世- 6 - 10 KW -怀孕应用KW -移动应用KW -问卷KW -怀孕KW -怀孕KW - mHealth KW -移动健康KW -横断面KW -用户需要KW——用户期望KW -调查千瓦孕产妇KW -孕妇KW -用户体验AB -背景:已经有一个在应用程序的可用性指数增长,导致怀孕的增加使用应用程序。然而，关于孕妇使用app的资源和信息相对有限。目的:本研究的目的是绘制当前信息资源和怀孕应用程序在孕妇在佛兰德斯的使用。方法:采用半结构化调查(2019年4月至6月)进行了一项横断面研究，包括四个不同领域:(1)人口统计学;(二)设备的使用;(三)信息来源;(4)使用怀孕应用程序。孕妇在产前咨询时通过社交媒体、传单和纸质问卷进行招募。统计分析主要集中在描述性统计。 Differences in continuous and categorical variables were tested using independent Student t tests and chi-square tests. Correlations were investigated between maternal characteristics and the women’s responses. Results: In total, 311 women completed the entire questionnaire. Obstetricians were the primary source of information (268/311, 86.2%) for pregnant women, followed by websites/internet (267/311, 85.9%) and apps (233/311, 74.9%). The information that was most searched for was information about the development of the baby (275/311, 88.5%), discomfort/complaints (251/311, 80.7%) and health during pregnancy (248/311, 79.7%), administrative/practical issues (233/311, 74.9%), and breastfeeding (176/311, 56.6%). About half of the women (172/311, 55.3%) downloaded a pregnancy app, and primarily searched app stores (133/311, 43.0%). Pregnant women who are single asked their mothers (22/30, 73.3%) or other family members (13/30, 43.3%) for significantly more information than did married women (mother [in law]: 82/160, 51.3%, P=.02; family members: 35/160, 21.9%, P=.01). Pregnant women with lower education were significantly more likely to have a PC or laptop than those with higher education (72/73, 98.6% vs 203/237, 85.5%; P=.008), and to consult other family members for pregnancy information (30/73, 41.1% vs 55/237, 23.1%; P<.001), but were less likely to consult a gynecologist (70/73, 95.9% vs 198/237, 83.5%; P=.001). They also followed more prenatal sessions (59/73, 80.8% vs 77/237, 32.5%; P=.04) and were more likely to search for information regarding discomfort/complaints during pregnancy (65/73, 89% vs 188/237, 79.5%; P=.02). Compared to multigravida, primigravida were more likely to solicit advice about their pregnancy from other women in their social networks (family members: primigravida 44/109, 40.4% vs multigravida 40/199, 20.1%; P<.001; other pregnant women: primigravida 58/109, 53.2% vs multigravida 80/199, 40.2%; P<.03). Conclusions: Health care professionals need to be aware that apps are important and are a growing source of information for pregnant women. Concerns rise about the quality and safety of those apps, as only a limited number of apps are subjected to an external quality check. Therefore, it is important that health care providers refer to high-quality digital resources and take the opportunity to discuss digital information with pregnant women. SN - 2561-326X UR - https://formative.www.mybigtv.com/2022/10/e37866 UR - https://doi.org/10.2196/37866 UR - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36222794 DO - 10.2196/37866 ID - info:doi/10.2196/37866 ER -