The Internet as a source of information about pregnancy, confinement and child care. The analysis of the research results in Poland
Keywords:
Internet, health information, doctor-patient relationship, health literacy, pregnancyAbstract
Introduction. In the last years the Internet is used in Poland by an increasing group of people who use this medium in the search of information in various fields.
Aim. The aim of the article is to describe the use of the Internet as a source of information about pregnancy, childbirth, confinement and child care and upbringing.
Material and methods. The research tool was Internet questionnaire. The sample consisted of 475 people who said they had been seeking information about pregnancy, childbirth or confinement over 12 months prior to the research.
Results. The Internet was used as a source of information about health for over 80% of respondents. The most frequently sought information about pregnancy concerned foetal development and nutrition in pregnancy; about childbirth – the stages of labour; information about child development and diseases was the most frequently sought by people with small children. According to those surveyed, the greatest advantage of Internet information is its availability all the day. Using the Internet has an influence on patient-physician relationship. Some respondents, having found useful information on the Internet, resigned from seeing a physician.
Discussion. Patients experience difficulties distinguishing reliable and adequate information from unclear, imprecise or inadequate information.
Conclusion. As a result, using the Internet poses some threats. It would be useful if specialists used the Internet, as it might contribute to improvement of the quality of medical services.
References
1. Fox S, Jones S. The social life of health information. Pew Internet & American Life Project June 2009. Accessed July 27, 2009:http://www.pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2009/PIP_Health_2009.pdf.
2. Dmochowska H. Demographic Yearbook 2009. Warsaw: Central Statistical Office; 2009.
3. Gemius plc. Guides for parents on the Internet. 2009; January 30. Accessed July 27, 2009: http://audyt.gemius.pl/poradniki_dla_rodzicow.php.
4. Szwajcer E, Hiddink G, Maas L, Koelen M, van Woerkum C. Nutrition related information-seeking behaviours of women trying to conceive and pregnant women: evidence for the life course perspective. Fam Pract. 2008;25;(Suppl 1):99-104.
5. Kubicka-Kraszyńska U, Otffinowska A. Prenatal and postnatal care in view of action ‘Childbirth with Dignity’ 2006. Warsaw: Childbirth with Dignity Foundation; 2007. Accessed July27,2009:http://rodzicpoludzku.pl/images/stories/publikacje/opieka_okoloporodowa_w_polsce2007.pdf .
6. Wald H, Dube C, Anthony D. Untangling the Web – the impact of Internet use on health care and the physician-patient relationship. Patient Educ Couns. 2007;68:218-24.
7. Helman CG. Culture, Health and Illness. London: Hodder Arnold; 2007:153.
8. Diaz J, Griffith R, Ng J, Reinert S, Friedmann P, Moulton A. Patients’ use of the Internet for medical information. J Gen Intern Med. 2002;17:180-5.
9. Larsson M. A descriptive study of the use of the Internet by women seeking pregnancy-related information. Midwifery. 2009;25:14-20.
10. Fox S. Online Health Search 2006. Pew Internet & American Life Project October 2006. Accessed July 29, 2009: http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2006/Online-Health-Search-2006.aspx?r=1.
11. Eysenbach G, Köhler C. How do consumers search for and appraise health information on the world wide web? Qualitative study using focus groups, usability tests, and in-depth interviews. BMJ. 2002;324:573-7.
12. Kaimal A, Cheng Y, Bryant A, Norton M, Shaffer B, Caughey A. Google obstetrics: who is educating our patient? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;198:682.e.1-682.e5.
13. Ayantunde A, Welch N, Parsons S. A survey of patient satisfaction and use of the Internet for health information. Int J Clinical Practise. 2007;61(3):458-62.
14. Williams N, Mughal S, Blair M. ‘Is my child developing normally?’: A critical review of web-based resources for parents. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2008;50(12):893-7.
15. Kukla R. How do patients know. The Hastings Center Report. 2007;37(5):27-35.
16. Schwartz K, Roe T, Northrup J, Meza J, Seifeldin R, Neale AV. Family medicine patients’ use of the internet for health information: A MetroNet study. J Am Board Fam Med. 2006;19(1):39-45.
17. Dilliway G, Maudsley G. Patients bringing information to primary care consultations: A cross-sectional (questionnaire) study of doctors’ and nurses’ views of its impact. J Eval Clin Pract. 2008;14(4):545-7.
18. McMullan M. Patients using the Internet to obtain health information: How this affects the patient–health professional relationship. Patient Educ Couns. 2006;63:24–8.
19. Cockerham W, Glasser M. Readings in medical sociology. New Jersey: Upper Saddle River; 2001. p.24.
20. White S. Assessing the Nation’s Health Literacy. Key concepts and findings of the National Assessment of Adult Literacy (NAAL), AMA Foundation; 2008. Accessed July 28, 2009: http://www.ama-assn.org/ama1/pub/upload/mm/367/hl_report_2008.pdf .
21. Shaw E, Howard M, Chan D, Waters H, Kaczorowski J, Price D, Zazulak J. Access to web-based personalized antenatal health records for pregnant women: a randomized controlled trial. J Obstet Gynecol Can. 2008;30(1):38-43.
