Search

BackgroundPregnancy apps are a booming global industry, with most pregnant women in high-income countries now using them. From the perspective of health care and health information provision, this is both encouraging and unsettling; the demand indicates a clear direction for the development of future resources, but it also underscores the importance of processes ensuring access, reliability, and quality control. ObjectiveThis review provides an overview of current literature on pregnancy apps and aims at describing (1) the ways in which apps are used by women, in general, and by those of a culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) background; (2) the utility and quality of information provided; and (3) areas where more research, development, and oversight are needed. MethodsWe chose a narrative review methodology for the study and performed a structured literature search including studies published between 2012 and 2017. Searches were performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases. Studies were identified for inclusion using two separate search criteria and strategies: (1) studies on pregnancy apps and pregnant women’s use of these apps and (2) studies on CALD pregnant women and their use of technology for accessing information on and services for pregnancy. Overall, we selected 38 studies. ResultsWe found that pregnancy apps were principally used to access pregnancy health and fetal development information. Data storage capability, Web-based features or personalized tools, and social media features were also popular app features sought by women. Lower rates of the pregnancy app uptake were indicated among lower-income and non-English-speaking women. Preliminary evidence indicates that a combination of technological, health literacy, and language issues may result in lower uptake of pregnancy apps by these groups; however, further investigation is required. A marked limitation of the health app industry is lack of regulation in a commercially dominated field, making it difficult for users to assess the reliability of the information being presented. Health professionals and users alike indicate that given the choice, they would prefer using pregnancy apps that are relevant to their local health care context and come from a trusted source. Evidence indicates a need for greater health professional and institutional engagement in the app development, as well as awareness of and guidance for women’s use of these resources. ConclusionsThis is the first review of pregnancy app use, types of information provided, and features preferred by pregnant women in general and by those of a CALD background in particular. It indicates the demand for access to accurate information that is relevant to users, their community, and their associated health services. Given the popularity of pregnancy apps, such apps have enormous potential to be used for the provision of accurate, evidence-based health information.

Introduction The Australasian Pelvic Floor Procedure Registry (APFPR) was established in 2019 to monitor safety and efficacy of pelvic floor procedures (PFP) that use prostheses. This followed increased international and Australian regulation of mesh for PFPs, resulting in an overall reduction in PFPs and changes to the procedure profile. The aim of this study was to determine contributing factors and clinician responses to clinical practice trends, and implications for the APFPR. Methods An online clinician survey was developed and distributed between July and October 2022 to APFPR contributing clinicians and USANZ and UGSA members. Descriptive statistics were calculated and stratified analysis performed. Results Seventy-nine valid responses were received. Approximately two-thirds of respondents reported a decline in procedures to implant mesh slings; forty percent reported a decline in mesh sacrocolpopexy; and 40% and 50% reported an increase in explantations of mesh used for stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and pelvic organ prolapse (POP) respectively. Contributing factors for SUI procedure changes were patient preference (83%) and litigation concerns (59%), for POP procedures it was mesh non-availability (81%). Clinician responses included changing to other procedures (SUI 54%; POP 71%); conservative management (SUI 17%); and upskilling and onward referral (14%, 10%) for POP. Responses varied by specialty group. A majority recommended adding native tissue SUI procedures to the APFPR. Conclusion The survey provides insights into the impact and implications of the reduction in pelvic prostheses over the last 5 years. The addition of native tissue SUI procedures to the APFPR will ensure it maintains clinical relevance in a changing landscape. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]