Womens Health Nurs.  2024 Sep;30(3):192-202. 10.4069/whn.2024.09.09.

Pregnant women’s experiences of online prenatal education in Korea during COVID-19: a phenomenological study

• Kim HK
• Jeong GH
• Min HY

• KMID: 2563715
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4069/whn.2024.09.09

Abstract

Purpose
This study aimed to explore the significance and insights derived from the experiences of pregnant women in Korea who participated in online prenatal education during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Methods
This study employed the hermeneutic phenomenology framework developed by Colaizzi. It involved 12 pregnant women who participated in online prenatal education provided by public health centers in Chuncheon, Korea. Data collection was achieved through in-depth interviews conducted in Korea from October 2021 to April 2022.
Results
In total, 51 significant statements were extracted from the interview data and then categorized into 10 themes. Finally, three categories were formed by merging similar themes. The three basic categories of participants’ experiences of online prenatal education were “feeling of safety and comfort in body and mind,” “frustrated by a lack of interaction,” and “digital education being a double-edged sword.” Pregnant women expressed ambivalence regarding the benefits and drawbacks of the online educational experience. They desired more interactive and practical learning opportunities, even as they appreciated the comfort of learning remotely.
Conclusion
This study revealed the phenomenon of online prenatal education as an advanced form of distance-based prenatal education instead of the traditional in-person classroom. To maximize the educational effectiveness of this new format, public health center policies must address the digital literacy gap and enhance accessibility by leveraging the immersive multimedia experiences that online education offers to pregnant women. We recommend that maternal healthcare providers adopt this innovative approach to prenatal education, utilizing distance education technology to improve participation and promote immersion.

Keyword

Digital technology; Distance education; Prenatal education; Pregnant women; Qualitative research

Reference

References

1. Haapio S, Kaunonen M, Arffman M, Åstedt-Kurki P. Effects of extended childbirth education by midwives on the childbirth fear of first-time mothers: an RCT. Scand J Caring Sci. 2017; 31(2):293–301. https://doi.org/10.1111/scs.12346.

2. Kim HK. The role of childbirth educators in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Korean J Women Health Nurs. 2022; 28(1):1–3. https://doi.org/10.4069/kjwhn.2022.02.25.

3. Chae JM, Kim HK. Internet-based prenatal interventions for maternal health among pregnant women: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Child Youth Serv Rev. 2021; 127:106079. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2021.106079.

4. McKinlay AR, Fancourt D, Burton A. Factors affecting the mental health of pregnant women using UK maternity services during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative interview study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2022; 22(1):313. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-022-04602-5.

5. Guo SH, Lin JL, Hsing HC, Lee CC, Chuang SM. The effect of mobile eHealth education to improve knowledge, skills, self-care, and mobile eHealth literacies among patients with diabetes: development and evaluation study. J Med Internet Res. 2023; 25:e42497. https://doi.org/10.2196/42497.

6. De Felice F, Petrillo A, Iovine G, Salzano C, Baffo I. How does the metaverse shape education? A systematic literature review. Appl Sci. 2023; 13(9):5682. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13095682.

7. Kovala S, Cramp AG, Xia L. Prenatal education: program content and preferred delivery method from the perspective of the expectant parents. J Perinat Educ. 2016; 25(4):232–241. https://doi.org/10.1891/1058-1243.25.4.232.

8. Whitworth K, Donnellan-Fernandez R, Fleet JA. Women's experiences of online antenatal education: an integrative literature review. J Adv Nurs. 2024; 80(5):1761–1775. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.15957.

9. Hao J, Yang L, Wang Y, Lan Y, Xu X, Wang Z, et al. Mobile prenatal education and its impact on reducing adverse pregnancy outcomes: retrospective real-world study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2023; 11:e46910. https://doi.org/10.2196/46910.

10. Gonzalez-Darias A, Diaz-Gomez NM, Rodriguez-Martin S, Hernandez-Perez C, Aguirre-Jaime A. ‘Supporting a first-time mother’: assessment of success of a breastfeeding promotion programme. Midwifery. 2020; 85:102687. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2020.102687.

11. Chua JY, Shorey S. Effectiveness of mobile application-based perinatal interventions in improving parenting outcomes: a systematic review. Midwifery. 2022; 114:103457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2022.103457.

12. Abuidhail J, Mrayan L, Jaradat D. Evaluating effects of prenatal web-based breastfeeding education for pregnant mothers in their third trimester of pregnancy: prospective randomized control trial. Midwifery. 2019; 69:143–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2018.11.015.

13. Mousavi SR, Amiri-Farahani L, Haghani S, Pezaro S. Comparing the effect of childbirth preparation courses delivered both in-person and via social media on pregnancy experience, fear of childbirth, birth preference and mode of birth in pregnant Iranian women: a quasi-experimental study. PLoS One. 2022; 17(8):e0272613. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0272613.

14. Lasheras G, Farré-Sender B, Osma J, Martínez-Borba V, Mestre-Bach G. Mother-infant bonding screening in a sample of postpartum women: comparison between online vs offline format. J Reprod Infant Psychol. 2022; 40(5):500–515. https://doi.org/10.1080/02646838.2021.1921716.

15. Colaizzi PF. Psychosocial research as the phenomenologist views it. In : Valle RS, King M, editors. Existential phenomenological alternatives for psychology. New York: Oxford University Press;1978. p. 6.

16. Creswell JW. Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five approaches. 3rd ed. HS Jo SW Jung JS Kim JS Kwon . Seoul: Hakjisa;2015.

17. Lee NI. Phenomenology and qualitative research. Seoul: Hangilsa;2018.

18. Morrow R, Rodriguez A, King N. Colaizzi’s descriptive phenomenological method. Psychologist. 2015; 28(8):643–644.

19. Angell C, van Teijlingen E, Hundley V, Ryan K. Users of the healthtalk.org breastfeeding webpages; their characteristics and views. Evid Based Midwifery. 2015; 13(2):54–58.

20. Ashford MT, Olander EK, Ayers S. Computer- or web-based interventions for perinatal mental health: a systematic review. J Affect Disord. 2016; 197:134–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2016.02.057.

21. Uludağ E, Serçekuş P, Vardar O, Özkan S, Alataş SE. Effects of online antenatal education on worries about labour, fear of childbirth, preparedness for labour and fear of covid-19 during the covid-19 pandemic: a single-blind randomised controlled study. Midwifery. 2022; 115:103484. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2022.103484.

22. Abbass-Dick J, Xie F, Koroluk J, Alcock Brillinger S, Huizinga J, Newport A, et al. The development and piloting of an eHealth breastfeeding resource targeting fathers and partners as co-parents. Midwifery. 2017; 50:139–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2017.04.004.

23. Shorey S, Ng YP, Ng ED, Siew AL, Mörelius E, Yoong J, et al. Effectiveness of a technology-based supportive educational parenting program on parental outcomes (part 1): randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res. 2019; 21(2):e10816. https://doi.org/10.2196/10816.

24. Graseck A, Leitner K. Prenatal education in the digital age. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2021; 64(2):345–351. https://doi.org/10.1097/GRF.0000000000000608.

25. Ellington K. Web-based perinatal education for the new obstetrical patient: a quality improvement project. J Perinat Educ. 2018; 27(2):115–120. https://doi.org/10.1891/1058-1243.27.2.115.

26. Wu H, Sun W, Huang X, Yu S, Wang H, Bi X, et al. Online antenatal care during the COVID-19 pandemic: opportunities and challenges. J Med Internet Res. 2020; 22(7):e19916. https://doi.org/10.2196/19916.