Design, Development, and Testing of BEST4Baby, an mHealth Technology to Support Exclusive Breastfeeding in India: Pilot Study.
agile
breastfeeding
low- and middle-income countries
mHealth
mobile health
mobile phone
peer counselors
rural
task shifting
usability
user-centered design
Journal
JMIR formative research
ISSN: 2561-326X
Titre abrégé: JMIR Form Res
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 101726394
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 Sep 2022
08 Sep 2022
Historique:
received:
11
08
2021
accepted:
26
05
2022
revised:
05
03
2022
entrez:
8
9
2022
pubmed:
9
9
2022
medline:
9
9
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) at 6 months of age in most low- and middle-income countries, including India, is surprisingly low. There is a relative lack of mobile health apps that specifically focus on leveraging the use of peer counselors (PCs) to support mothers as a means of increasing EBF practices in low- and middle-income countries. This study aimed to design, develop, and test the usability of Breastfeeding Education Support Tool for Baby (BEST4Baby), a mobile health app specifically designed to support PCs in providing in-home breastfeeding counseling support to mothers in rural India on optimal breastfeeding practices. A user-centered design process with an agile development methodology was used. The approach involved stakeholders and mothers who were trained to serve as PCs to guide BEST4Baby's design and development, including the app's content and features. PCs were engaged through focus groups with interactive wireframes. During the 24-month pilot study period, we conducted a feasibility test of the BEST4Baby app with 22 PCs who supported home visits with mothers residing in rural India. The intervention protocol required PCs to provide education and follow mothers using the BEST4Baby app, with 9 scheduled home visits from the late prenatal stage to 6 months post partum. BEST4Baby's usability from the PCs' perspective was assessed using the translated System Usability Scale (SUS). The findings of this study align with best practices in user-centered design (ie, understanding user experience, including context with iterative design with stakeholders) to address EBF barriers. This led to the cultural tailoring and contextual alignment of an evidence-based World Health Organization breastfeeding program with an iterative design and agile development of the BEST4Baby app. A total of 22 PCs tested and rated the BEST4Baby app as highly usable, with a mean SUS score of 85.3 (SD 9.1), placing it over the 95th percentile for SUS scores. The approach translated into a highly usable BEST4Baby app for use by PCs in breastfeeding counseling, which also statistically increased EBF practices. The findings suggest that BEST4Baby was highly usable and accepted by mothers serving as PCs to support other mothers in their EBF practices and led to positive outcomes in the intervention group's EBF rates. The pilot study demonstrated that using the specially designed BEST4Baby app was an important support tool for mothers to serve as PCs during the 9 home visits. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03533725; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03533725.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) at 6 months of age in most low- and middle-income countries, including India, is surprisingly low. There is a relative lack of mobile health apps that specifically focus on leveraging the use of peer counselors (PCs) to support mothers as a means of increasing EBF practices in low- and middle-income countries.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to design, develop, and test the usability of Breastfeeding Education Support Tool for Baby (BEST4Baby), a mobile health app specifically designed to support PCs in providing in-home breastfeeding counseling support to mothers in rural India on optimal breastfeeding practices.
METHODS
METHODS
A user-centered design process with an agile development methodology was used. The approach involved stakeholders and mothers who were trained to serve as PCs to guide BEST4Baby's design and development, including the app's content and features. PCs were engaged through focus groups with interactive wireframes. During the 24-month pilot study period, we conducted a feasibility test of the BEST4Baby app with 22 PCs who supported home visits with mothers residing in rural India. The intervention protocol required PCs to provide education and follow mothers using the BEST4Baby app, with 9 scheduled home visits from the late prenatal stage to 6 months post partum. BEST4Baby's usability from the PCs' perspective was assessed using the translated System Usability Scale (SUS).
RESULTS
RESULTS
The findings of this study align with best practices in user-centered design (ie, understanding user experience, including context with iterative design with stakeholders) to address EBF barriers. This led to the cultural tailoring and contextual alignment of an evidence-based World Health Organization breastfeeding program with an iterative design and agile development of the BEST4Baby app. A total of 22 PCs tested and rated the BEST4Baby app as highly usable, with a mean SUS score of 85.3 (SD 9.1), placing it over the 95th percentile for SUS scores. The approach translated into a highly usable BEST4Baby app for use by PCs in breastfeeding counseling, which also statistically increased EBF practices.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The findings suggest that BEST4Baby was highly usable and accepted by mothers serving as PCs to support other mothers in their EBF practices and led to positive outcomes in the intervention group's EBF rates. The pilot study demonstrated that using the specially designed BEST4Baby app was an important support tool for mothers to serve as PCs during the 9 home visits.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03533725; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03533725.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36074546
pii: v6i9e32795
doi: 10.2196/32795
pmc: PMC9501669
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03533725']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e32795Subventions
Organisme : FIC NIH HHS
ID : R21 TW010609
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
©Tony Ma, Katie Chang, Amal Alyusuf, Elina Bajracharya, Yukiko Washio, Patricia J Kelly, Roopa M Bellad, Niranjana S Mahantashetti, Umesh Charantimath, Vanessa L Short, Parth Lalakia, Frances Jaeger, Shivaprasad Goudar, Richard Derman. Originally published in JMIR Formative Research (https://formative.jmir.org), 08.09.2022.
Références
J Family Med Prim Care. 2019 Jan;8(1):54-61
pubmed: 30911481
PLoS One. 2014 Nov 04;9(11):e109181
pubmed: 25369452
Natl Med J India. 2019 Sep-Oct;32(5):262-269
pubmed: 32985439
Acta Paediatr. 2015 Dec;104(467):3-13
pubmed: 26249674
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2015 Apr 29;15:36
pubmed: 25924825
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2016 Jul 07;16:84
pubmed: 27387548
Lancet. 2016 Jan 30;387(10017):475-90
pubmed: 26869575
Lancet Glob Health. 2018 Nov;6(11):e1196-e1252
pubmed: 30196093
Breastfeed Med. 2010 Dec;5(6):303-7
pubmed: 20925495
PLoS One. 2015 Jun 16;10(6):e0126322
pubmed: 26079713
J Correct Health Care. 2019 Jul;25(3):231-237
pubmed: 31242801
J Clin Diagn Res. 2016 Sep;10(9):LC16-LC20
pubmed: 27790473
PLoS One. 2020 May 4;15(5):e0231755
pubmed: 32365108
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2022 Jan;156(1):48-54
pubmed: 33454986
PLoS One. 2012;7(9):e45143
pubmed: 23028810
Lancet. 2016 Jan 30;387(10017):491-504
pubmed: 26869576
PLoS One. 2017 Jan 20;12(1):e0166623
pubmed: 28107350
PLoS One. 2017 Jul 26;12(7):e0180722
pubmed: 28746353
Int Breastfeed J. 2016 Jun 18;11:17
pubmed: 27330542
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2017 Apr;30(7):834-838
pubmed: 27160763
Hum Resour Health. 2021 Jan 6;19(1):7
pubmed: 33407518
Int Breastfeed J. 2019 May 16;14:20
pubmed: 31131015
J Glob Health. 2019 Dec;9(2):0204249
pubmed: 31788233
Iran J Nurs Midwifery Res. 2019 Sep-Oct;24(5):323-329
pubmed: 31516516
Matern Child Nutr. 2016 Jul;12(3):381-401
pubmed: 26194599
Child Youth Serv Rev. 2020 Dec;119:105535
pubmed: 33020676
J Vis Exp. 2012 Jun 20;(64):
pubmed: 22759999
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Oct 08;(10):CD010414
pubmed: 24101553
Breastfeed Med. 2019 Mar;14(2):108-114
pubmed: 30676061
PLoS Med. 2019 Oct 24;16(10):e1002939
pubmed: 31647821
BMJ. 2012 Jan 25;344:d8287
pubmed: 22277543
BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 Jan 20;20(1):48
pubmed: 31959157
JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2018 Apr 30;4(2):e34
pubmed: 29712626
Health Technol (Berl). 2015;5(1):35-43
pubmed: 26097799