EMAeHealth, a digital tool for the self-management of women's health needs during pregnancy, childbirth and the puerperium: protocol for a hybrid effectiveness-implementation study.

INTRODUCTION: EHealth can help health service users take a more active role in decision-making and help health professionals guide the patient in this process. A digital tool has been designed to support maternal education (ME), and it is organised into four areas: (1) information, (2) communication, (3) health self-management and (4) clinical data. The main objective of the study is to evaluate the effectiveness of the EMAeHealth digital tool, and assess its usability and acceptability under routine conditions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Hybrid implementation-effectiveness design: (1) A cluster randomised, prospective, longitudinal, multicentre clinical trial to evaluate the effectiveness of EMAeHealth in (A) improving health-related quality of life (primary outcome), (B) improving self-efficacy for labour and childbirth and self-efficacy in breast feeding and (C) reducing the number of visits to the obstetric emergency services and health centre in situations of 'non-pathological pregnancy', 'false labour pains' and 'non-pathological puerperium'. The EMAeHealth intervention plus usual care will be compared with receiving only usual care, which includes traditional ME. N=1080 participants, 540 for each study arm. Two measurements will be made throughout the pregnancy and three in the first 16 weeks post partum. (2) A mixed-method study to evaluate the usability and acceptability of the tool, barriers and facilitators for its use, and implementation in our health system: focus groups (women, professionals and agents involved) and a quantitative analysis of implementation indicators. ANALYSIS: It will be carried out by intention to treat, using mixed models taking into account the hierarchical structure of the data and per protocol to evaluate the effectiveness of the express use of the digital tool. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Clinical Research Ethics Committee of Euskadi, Spain, (Ref: PI2020044) approved this study. The results will be actively disseminated through manuscript publications and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04937049.

Attitudes toward medicalization in childbirth and their relationship with locus of control and coping in a Spanish population.

The dominant model of childbirth in most Western countries is medicalized childbirth. Women's beliefs about whether childbirth should be a medicalized process to a greater or lesser degree may be related, in addition to contextual factors, to internal factors. The objective of the study is to find out if women's locus of control (LC) and stress coping strategies (CS) are related to having a more favourable or less favourable attitude towards medicalization (ATMC). A cross-sectional study was carried out with the participation of 248 women recruited in primary care centres by their midwives. All the women filled in answers on a mobile phone app with various different measurement instruments: the questionnaire created by Benyamini to evaluate their ATMC; the Spanish version of the Wallston MLC to evaluate their LC; and the Spanish adaptation of the "Revised Prenatal Coping Inventory (NuPCI)" scale for the assessment of their CS. The women presented a favourable attitude towards medicalization, with a mean ATMC score of 3.42. Both the LC and the CS of women during pregnancy are related to this attitude. Specifically, having an internal LC and using preparative CS both lower the probability of presenting a favourable attitude towards medicalization, while the lack of a paid job raises the probability. For each point in internal locus and preparatory coping, the ATMC score decreased by 0.02 and 0.23 points, respectively, while it increased by 0.18 for not having a paid job. The influence of these psychological factors must be taken into account in the development of content and interventions that promote a more natural birth.