Effects of educational technologies developed for labor and delivery: a systematic review
Abstract
Introduction: Educational technologies (ET) are highly relevant tools for the production, dissemination, and transmission of knowledge. Within the field of Obstetric Nursing, these devices are used for health education and promotion activities, with the purpose of promoting the autonomy of pregnant women and their companions, thus strengthening good practices in childbirth and delivery.
Objective: to evaluate the effects of educational technologies developed for labor and delivery.
Material and Method: A systematic review was developed according to JBI recommendations. The research question was formulated using the PICOS acronym, and its report was described according to PRISMA. Searches were conducted in the Pubmed/Medline, Cochrane, Scopus, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and grey literature databases, without idiomatic and/or temporal restrictions. The RoB-2 and Robins-I tools were used to assess the risk of bias, and GRADE was used to assess the quality of evidence.
Results: 630 studies were retrieved, of which 7 comprised the final sample of the review. Pregnant women who used TE showed greater knowledge about the signs of labor and delivery, in addition to feeling more prepared to experience these moments. Among the companions, there was greater security and expansion of support actions for women, with increased autonomy and empowerment, which contributed to greater satisfaction of postpartum women in relation to childbirth.
Conclusion: the use of educational technologies proved to be effective and promotes improved knowledge and satisfaction of pregnant women and their birth companions when used effectively, obtaining a “strong” degree of recommendation.
Downloads
-
Abstract50
-
ESP_PDF (Español (España))12
-
ENG_PDF4
-
PORT_PDF (Português )7
-
XML (Español (España))0
References
1. Ministério da Saúde (BR). Diretrizes nacionais de assistência ao parto normal. Secretaria de Ciência, Tecnologia e Insumos Estratégicos. Departamento de Gestão e Incorporação de Tecnologias em Saúde. Brasília; 2022. Disponível em: https://www.febrasgo.org.br/pt/noticias/item/download/615_9c68b60515aeb7bb1f3f022505721f2b
2. Nunes MBL, Oliveira TA, Silva JJA, Nascimento EGC. Sentimentos da mulher frente a gestação de alto risco. Enfermería Actual de Costa Rica [Internet]. 2024; 46: 58441.doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.15517/enferm.actual.cr.i46.52604
3. Merhy EE, Feuerwerker LCM. Novo olhar sobre as tecnologias de saúde: uma necessidade contemporânea. Merhy EE, Baduy RS, Seixas CT, Almeida DES, Slomp Junior H, organizadores. Avaliação compartilhada do cuidado em saúde: surpreendendo o instituído nas redes. Rio de Janeiro: Hexis, 2016; 1, 59-72.
4. Salbego C, Nietsche EA. Praxis Model for Technology Development: a participatory approach . Rev esc enferm USP [Internet]. 2023;57:e20230041. doi: https://doi.org/10.1590/1980-220X-REEUSP-2023-0041en
5. Lima AMC, Dalle PCSL, Silva ALO, Robazzi MLDCC, Mélo CB, Vasconcelos SC. Tecnologias educacionais na promoção da saúde do idoso. Enfermagem em Foco, 2020; 11(4). doi: https://doi.org/10.21675/2357-707X.2020.v11.n4.3277
6. Cavalcante LPS, Nunes JV, Guerra MAMA. Implicações da gestão do conhecimento na Ciência da Informação frente às tecnologias educacionais: uma análise bibliométrica na Brapci. Encontro Brasileiro de Bibliometria e Cientometria, 2024; 9, 1-7. doi: https://doi.org/10.22477/ix.ebbc.390
7. Honnef F, Silveira S, Silveira QJ, Ferreira LT, Cardoso PC, Maris MPS. Tecnologias educacionais para promoção de experiência de parto positiva: revisão integrativa. Ciênc. cuid. saúde, 2022; p. e59213-e59213. doi: https://doi.org/10.4025/ciencuidsaude.v21i0.59213
8. Tufanaru C, Munn Z, Aromataris E, Campbell J, Hopp L. Revisões sistemáticas de eficácia. Aromataris E, Lockwood C, Porritt K, Pilla B, Jordan Z, editores. Manual JBI para Síntese de Evidências. JBI; 2024. doi: https://doi.org/10.46658/JBIMES-24-03
9. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, Shamseer L, Tetzlaff JM, Akl EA, Brennan SE, Chou R, Glanville J, Grimshaw JM, Hróbjartsson A, Lalu MM, Li T, Loder EW, Mayo- -Wilson E, McDonald S, McGuinness LA, Stewart LA, Thomas J, Tricco AC, Welch VA, Whiting P, Moher D. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021; 372:n71.
10. Higgins JPT, Savović J, Page MJ, Elbers RG, Sterne JAC. Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in a randomized trial [last updated October 2019]. In: Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 6.5. Cochrane, 2024. Available from: www.training.cochrane.org/handbook
11. Sterne JA, Hernajn MA, Reeves BC, Savovia J, Berkman ND, Viswanathan M et al. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions BMJ 2016; 355 :i4919. doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i4919
12. GRADE Working Group. GRADEpro Guideline Development Tool (GDT). Evidence Prime Inc.; 2023. Available from: http://www.gradeworkinggroup.org
13. Mendes IC, Teles LMR, Costa CC, Soares FMM, Monte AS, Castro RCMB, Maciel NS, Damasceno AKC. Eficácia de manual educativo no apoio prestado por acompanhantes em centro obstétrico: ensaio clínico randomizado. Texto Contexto Enferm [Internet]. 2024 32:e20230250. doi: https://doi.org/10.1590/1980-265X-TCE-2023-0250pt
14. Cassiano AN, Teixeira E, Menezes RMP. Educational technology for primigravidae: a quasi-experimental study. Rev Esc Enferm USP. 2022;56:e20220040. doi: https://doi.org/10.1590/1980-220X-REEUSP-2022-0040en
15. Silva LR, Vasconcelos CTM, Nicolau AIO, Teles LMR, Ribeiro GL, Damasceno AKC. The effect of educational technology use to guide parturient women’s companions: a randomized controlled study. Rev Esc Enferm USP. 2021;55:e03666. doi: https://doi.org/10.1590/S1980-220X2019022903666
16. Franzon ACA, Oliveira-Ciabati L, Bonifácio LP, Vieira EM, Andrade MS, Sanchez JAC, et al.. Estratégia de comunicação e informação em saúde e a percepção de sentir-se preparada para o parto: ensaio aleatorizado por conglomerados (PRENACEL). Cad Saúde Pública [Internet]. 2019;35(10):e00111218. doi: https://doi.org/10.1590/0102-311X00111218
17. Andrade IS et al. Efeitos de tecnologia no conhecimento, atitude e prática de gestantes para o parto. Rev Rene, 2019(20), e41341. doi: https://doi.org/10.15253/2175-6783.20192041341
18. Hatamleh R, Abujilban S, AbuAbed ASA, Abuhammad S. The effects of a childbirth preparation course on birth outcomes among nulliparous Jordanian women. Midwifery. 2019. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2019.02.002
19. Rahimparvar SFV, Hamzehkhani M, Geranmayeh M, Rahimi R. Effect of educational software on self-efficacy of pregnant women to cope with labor: a randomized controlled trial. Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 2012; 286(1), 63–70. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-012-2243-4
20. Chen HM, Li Y, Wang J, Sun X, Feng S. Effects of mobile application–based childbirth education on maternal outcomes: a systematic review. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2021;50(3):235-46. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jogn.2021.01.002
21. Fernández Turienzo C, Newburn M, Agyepong A, Silverio SA, McKenzie G, Bewley S. Enhancing maternal confidence and reducing fear of childbirth through digital and face-to-face antenatal education: a mixed-methods systematic review. Women Birth. 2020;33(5):e431-9. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wombi.2019.09.005
22. Hollander MH, Rooij K, Schrauwen W, Schuitmaker-Warnaar TJ, Ruiter L. Prenatal partner education and its impact on childbirth support: a systematic review. Midwifery. 2019;75:45-53. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2019.04.007
23. Hodnett ED, Gates S, Hofmeyr GJ, Sakala C, Weston J. Continuous support for women during childbirth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;(7):CD003766. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003766.pub5
24. Lumbiganon P, Laopaiboon M, Gülmezoglu AM, Souza JP, Taneepanichskul S, Ruyan P, et al. WHO multicountry survey on maternal and newborn health: quality of care during childbirth. Lancet. 2014;384(9952):1240-8. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60696-7
25. Walker DS, Visger JM, Rossie D. Lived experiences of fear of childbirth after traumatic birth: a qualitative study. J Perinat Educ. 2018;27(4):234-44. doi: https://doi.org/10.1891/1058-1243.27.4.234
26. Dykes L, Roennfeldt H, Gullick J. Barriers and facilitators to digital health literacy: a scoping review. Health Inform J. 2020;26(4):2999-3018. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1460458220944727
27. Sutcliffe K, Thomas J. Digital technologies in maternity care: opportunities and inequalities. Midwifery. 2022;109:103312. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2022.103312
28. Al-Tamimi YZ, Al-Yanna F, Hussain K. Accuracy and safety of digital educational content for pregnant women: a cross-sectional evaluation of mobile apps. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2021;21:544. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-021-04007-5
Copyright (c) 2026 Global Nursing
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The works published in this magazine are subject to the following terms:
1. The Publications Service of the University of Murcia (the publisher) preserves the copyright of the published works, and encourages and allows the reuse of the works under the license for use stated in point 2.
© Servicio de Publicaciones, Universidad de Murcia, 2011 (© Publications Service, University of Murcia, 2011)
2. The works are published in the electronic edition of the journal under Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial-SinObraDerivada 3.0 España(texto legal) “ a Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 Spain license (legal text)”. They can be copied, used, broadcasted, transmitted and publicly displayed, provided that: i) the authorship and original source of their publication (journal, publisher and URL) are cited; (ii) are not used for commercial purposes; iii) the existence and specifications of this license is mentioned.
3. Conditions of self-archiving. Authors are allowed and encouraged to electronically disseminate the pre-print (pre-reviewed ) and / or post-print (reviewed and accepted for publication) versions of their works prior to publication, as it ensures a wider circulation and dissemination which may lead to a possible increase in its mention and a higher scope among the academic community. RoMEO color: green.
