Background: In 2009, the Steering Committee for Pregnancy and Childbirth in the Netherlands recommended the implementation of continuous care during labor in order to improve perinatal outcomes. However, in current care, routine maternity caregivers are unable to provide this type of care, resulting in an implementation rate of less than 30%. Maternity care assistants (MCAs), who already play a nursing role in low risk births in the second stage of labor and in homecare during the postnatal period, might be able to fill this gap. In this study, we aim to explore the (cost) effectiveness of adding MCAs to routine first- and second-line maternity care, with the idea that these MCAs would offer continuous care to women during labor. Methods: A randomized controlled trial (RCT) will be performed comparing continuous care (CC) with care-as-usual (CAU). All women intending to have a vaginal birth, who have an understanding of the Dutch language and are > 18 years of age, will be eligible for inclusion. The intervention consists of the provision of continuous care by a trained MCA from the moment the supervising maternity caregiver establishes that labor has started. The primary outcome will be use of epidural analgesia (EA). Our secondary outcomes will be referrals from primary care to secondary care, caesarean delivery, instrumental delivery, adverse outcomes associated with epidural (fever, augmentation of labor, prolonged labor, postpartum hemorrhage, duration of postpartum stay in hospital for mother and/or newborn), women’s satisfaction with the birth experience, cost-effectiveness, and a budget impact analysis. Cost effectiveness will be calculated by QALY per prevented EA based on the utility index from the EQ-5D and the usage of healthcare services. A standardized sensitivity analysis will be carried out to quantify the outcome in addition to a budget impact analysis. In order to show a reduction from 25 to 17% in the primary outcome (alpha 0.05 and bèta 0.20), taking into account an extra 10% sample size for multi-level analysis and an attrition rate of 10%, 2 × 496 women will be needed (n = 992). Discussion: We expect that adding MCAs to the routine maternity care team will result in a decrease in the use of epidural analgesia and subsequent costs without a reduction in patient satisfaction. It will therefore be a costeffective intervention. Trial registration: Trial Registration: Netherlands Trial Register, NL8065. Registered 3 October 2019 - Retrospectively registered.
BackgroundPeople from lower and middle socioeconomic classes and vulnerable populations are among the worst affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, thus exacerbating disparities and the digital divide.ObjectiveTo draw a portrait of e-services as a digital approach to support digital health literacy in vulnerable populations amid the COVID-19 infodemic, and identify the barriers and facilitators for their implementation.MethodsA scoping review was performed to gather published literature with a broad range of study designs and grey literature without exclusions based on country of publication. A search was created in Medline (Ovid) in March 2021 and translated to Medline, PsycINFO, Scopus and CINAHL with Full Text (EBSCOhost). The combined literature search generated 819 manuscripts. To be included, manuscripts had to be written in English, and present information on digital intervention(s) (e.g. social media) used to enable or increase digital health literacy among vulnerable populations during the COVID-19 pandemic (e.g. older adults, Indigenous people living on reserve).ResultsFive articles were included in the study. Various digital health literacy-enabling e-services have been implemented in different vulnerable populations. Identified e-services aimed to increase disease knowledge, digital health literacy and social media usage, help in coping with changes in routines and practices, decrease fear and anxiety, increase digital knowledge and skills, decrease health literacy barriers and increase technology acceptance in specific groups. Many facilitators of digital health literacy-enabling e-services implementation were identified in expectant mothers and their families, older adults and people with low-income. Barriers such as low literacy limited to no knowledge about the viruses, medium of contamination, treatment options played an important role in distracting and believing in misinformation and disinformation. Poor health literacy was the only barrier found, which may hinder the understanding of individual health needs, illness processes and treatments for people with HIV/AIDS.ConclusionsThe literature on the topic is scarce, sparse and immature. We did not find any literature on digital health literacy in Indigenous people, though we targeted this vulnerable population. Although only a few papers were included, two types of health conditions were covered by the literature on digital health literacy-enabling e-services, namely chronic conditions and conditions that are new to the patients. Digital health literacy can help improve prevention and adherence to a healthy lifestyle, improve capacity building and enable users to take the best advantage of the options available, thus strengthening the patient’s involvement in health decisions and empowerment, and finally improving health outcomes. Therefore, there is an urgent need to pursue research on digital health literacy and develop digital platforms to help solve current and future COVID-19-related health needs.
Abstract Background: Healthcare professionals encounter ethical dilemmas and concerns in their practice. More research is needed to understand these ethical problems and to know how to educate professionals to respond to them. Research objective: To describe ethical dilemmas and concerns at work from the perspectives of Finnish and Dutch healthcare professionals studying at the master’s level. Research design: Exploratory, qualitative study that used the text of student online discussions of ethical dilemmas at work as data. Method: Participants’ online discussions were analyzed using inductive content analysis. Participants: The sample consisted of 49 students at master’s level enrolled in professional ethics courses at universities in Finland and the Netherlands. Ethical considerations: Permission for conducting the study was granted from both universities of applied sciences. All students provided their informed consent for the use of their assignments as research data. Findings: Participants described 51 problematic work situations. Among these, 16 were found to be ethical dilemmas, and the remaining were work issues with an ethical concern and did not meet criteria of a dilemma. The most common problems resulted from concerns about quality care, safety of healthcare professionals, patients’ rights, and working with too few staff and inadequate resources. Discussion: The results indicated that participants were concerned about providing quality of care and raised numerous questions about how to provide it in challenging situations. The results show that it was difficult for students to differentiate ethical dilemmas from other ethical work concerns. Conclusion: Online discussions among healthcare providers give them an opportunity to relate ethical principles to real ethical dilemmas and problems in their work as well as to critically analyze ethical issues. We found that discussions with descriptions of ethical dilemmas and concerns by health professionals provide important information and recommendations not only for education and practice but also for health policy.
