Background
Australian women commonly use complementary medicine products (CMPs) such as herbal medicines (over 50% of women) and vitamin or mineral supplements (almost 90% of women) in pregnancy [
1,
2]. Herbal medicine use in pregnancy ranges from 4 to 69% worldwide [
2]. Australian breastfeeding women also commonly use herbal medicines [
3] and herbal galactagogue use has been noted internationally also [
4‐
6]. Some specific nutritional supplements like folic acid and iodine are recommended during pregnancy or breastfeeding [
7] while women take other popular CMPs like multivitamins because they believe this will help them meet the additional nutritional requirements of pregnancy and lactation [
8]. In general, consumers actively seek health information outside of health care consultations [
9], and Australian mothers access a variety of information sources including additional health care professionals, other pregnant or breastfeeding mothers, and media, including the Internet [
3,
10‐
12].
Self-determination in health care choices may influence pregnant or breastfeeding mothers’ choices to use CMPs [
13‐
16], especially in relation to desiring holistic health care [
15]. Common reasons given for mothers’ use of CMPs include
treatment of common conditions of pregnancy or lactation [
3,
17,
18], to prepare for a natural childbirth [
13,
16,
19], and to support and maintain health [
20] or breastmilk production [
3,
17,
21]. Other factors identified that have been associated with use of complementary therapies, including CMPs, in pregnancy include cultural factors, positive experiences with previous use, and perceptions that complementary medicines may be a safer choice than pharmaceutical medications [
16,
22]. Many women feel a responsibility to bear healthy children, leading to balancing what they perceive as possible harms to the health of their unborn or breastfeeding babies and themselves while also considering their health care practitioners’ (HCPs’) advice [
22]. This results in decisions to take or not to take CMPs and pharmaceutical medicines, primarily influenced by perceived possible harms to their babies [
22].
Other research into decision-making around use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), including CMPs in pregnancy and lactation, has found that women’s decisions are influenced by personal beliefs and previous experiences of CAM due to difficulties in finding reliable information [
16]. Perceptions of their HCPs’ personal beliefs regarding CAM, scope of practice, and time spent in consultation also influence women’s information-seeking behaviours [
16]. While both biomedical and CAM HCPs may be consulted during pregnancy and lactation, women actively seek information on CMPs from their CAM HCPs whom they view as providing holistic care. Biomedical providers’ opinions on CMPs may be dismissed if they are perceived to have little expertise in CAM therapies and to either be against or uninformed about CAM therapies [
16]. Time constraints of appointments with obstetricians and midwives are also frustrating for women wanting to discuss their pregnancies or breastfeeding difficulties, furthering their appreciation of time spent with CAM HCPs [
16,
23]. Specific research into women’s choices to use CMPs in lactation, link decision-making to psychological benefits related to perceived and actual increases in breastmilk production, successful breastfeeding and self-care during the postpartum period [
17,
21,
24‐
26].
Health literacy is defined as the ability to seek, find and understand health information, and use that information to make informed decisions [
27‐
29]. Three main health literacy and information seeking related concerns are apparent in the literature when looking at women’s CMP use in pregnancy and lactation. These are 1) women’s difficulties in finding CMPs information [
16]; 2) HCPs’ concerns with women’s reliance on lay information sources, and consequent self-prescription of CMPs [
11,
16,
30]; and 3) concerns regarding women’s perceptions that CMPs are natural and therefore safe, when the safety profiles of many CMPs have not been established [
11,
31]. A lack of confidence in analysing available information, and lack of evidence around CMP use in pregnancy and lactation has been expressed both in published research and by women themselves [
16,
17,
32].
While the Australian prevalence of CMP use in pregnancy and lactation, and common reasons for its use have been investigated [
1,
3,
12], women’s decision-making processes and factors that influence women to take or not to take CMPs during pregnancy and lactation have not been adequately explored [
11,
13]. As part of a larger investigation into health literacy and decision-making processes pregnant and/or breastfeeding women use when choosing to use CMPs, this paper aims to explore and describe the factors that influence women’s decisions to take or not to take a CMP when pregnant or breastfeeding.
Methods
The methods used in this research have been previously published in a related paper that reports different results [
33]. Further information can also be found in Additional file
1.
Operational definition of complementary medicine products (CMPs)
For the purposes of this research, CMPs were defined as herbal medicines in tea, capsule, tablet or ethanolic extract form [
34,
35] ingested, or applied topically as creams or inhalations; vitamin and/or mineral micronutrient supplements; and food supplements (e.g. probiotics or protein powders) [
36]. CMPs could be self-prescribed and purchased over-the-counter, or after consultation with a health care practitioner [
37].
Study design
A qualitative research design using semi-structured in-depth interviews (IDIs) and focus group discussions (FGDs) was used. The semi-structured nature of the questions guided the inquiry, but were flexible so participants could elaborate on information important to them, and allowed new information to arise [
38]. Women’s perceptions, beliefs, values and motivations for CMP use when pregnant or breastfeeding were central to the inquiry, and qualitative methods enabled an appropriate investigation of these [
38,
39]. The use of both interviews and focus group discussions allowed women to choose the format with which they were most comfortable, and the use of telephone or Skype interviews allowed women at a distance from the researcher to participate.
Participants and recruitment
To be eligible for the study, women needed to be over the age of 18, currently pregnant and/or breastfeeding, and living in the Northern Rivers region or Sydney, New South Wales, or metropolitan areas of Brisbane or the Gold Coast in Queensland. These areas were chosen for proximity to the researchers. Participants also needed to be currently taking or have taken at least one CMP in the last year and have sufficient English-language skills to participate. Face-to-face IDIs and FGDs took place in public places comfortable for the mothers including public libraries, playgroup venues and community centres. All participants were given a $20 supermarket voucher to thank them for their participation.
Participants were initially recruited through purposive sampling, followed by snowball sampling. The lead author obtained permission to visit a range of groups such as antenatal classes, playgroups, pregnancy and postnatal yoga classes, and support groups in the Northern Rivers Region to briefly explain the study and leave information flyers. Posters and flyers were also displayed in local pharmacies and allied health practices. Additionally, the study was advertised on free local classified advertising networks for all included regions, and through [The Institution’s] electronic media channels and posters on campus. After 22 participants, and using concurrent analysis alongside data collection, thematic saturation was reached [
40]. An additional three interviews were held to confirm that no new themes were evident.
Data collection
The guiding theme for this investigation centred on women’s decision-making regarding CMP use in pregnancy and lactation. The open questions used to explore this theme are detailed in Table
1. These questions were refined after pre-testing for face and content validity with five women through a semi-structured interview (one pregnant woman), and a focus group discussion (one pregnant and three breastfeeding women). All IDIs and FGDs were audio recorded and transcribed by an independent transcription service. The lead author also kept a detailed research journal throughout the process to document ideas and themes as they became apparent.
Table 1
Questions used to guide semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions [
33]
a
1. Why do you use complementary medicine products? |
2. What sort of information do you want when considering taking complementary medicine products? |
3. What sort of information do you feel women who are pregnant or lactating need when considering using complementary medicine products? |
4. Where do you find the information you need when choosing to use complementary medicine products in pregnancy or whilst breastfeeding? What resources do you use? |
5. What do you feel would help pregnant and lactating women get the complementary medicines information they want and need to make safe decisions regarding using complementary medicine products? |
6. How easy is it for you to understand the information about complementary medicines you access? What would help you understand this information better? |
7. Can you please describe the decision-making processes you use when choosing to take complementary medicine products? |
In-depth interviews and focus group discussions were held over an eight-month period, from February to October 2016. Participants received an information sheet and had the opportunity to discuss the study and their possible participation with the lead author before consenting to participate. All participants signed consent forms before participating in an IDI or FGD. Consent was also confirmed orally and audio-recorded before FGDs and IDIs commenced. Participation was voluntary, and women could choose to withdraw from the study at any time. Participants could choose to participate in either an IDI or a FGD, and if an IDI, choose whether this occurred face-to-face, over the telephone or Skype, according to what was most convenient for them, and their family and work commitments. The lead author conducted all interviews and focus groups.
Demographic details and data on women’s use of CMPs at the time of the interview and in the previous 12 months were also collected.
Women’s health literacy levels were measured using two validated health literacy screening tools completed verbally and individually before participating in IDIs or FGDs. The first was the standard single question health literacy measure ‘
How confident are you filling out medical forms by yourself?’, which uses a scale of responses to identify consumers with inadequate health literacy [
41]. The second was the
Newest Vital Sign, a three-minute direct test of participants’ abilities [
42]. This identifies people with potential limitations in functional health literacy by measuring reading ability and interpretation skills, and aspects of numeracy necessary to understand nutritional information on food labels [
42,
43].
Data analysis
Descriptive statistics were used to analyse the results from the demographic survey and health literacy assessment tools. Responses to the single-item health literacy measure were recorded from the options ‘extremely’, ‘quite a bit’, ‘somewhat’, ‘a little bit’ and ‘not at all’. Those that chose ‘somewhat’, ‘a little bit’ or ‘not at all’ were considered to be at risk of limited health literacy [
41,
44]. For the
Newest Vital Sign assessment, participants who answered four or more of the six questions correctly were considered to have adequate functional health literacy; a score of less than four indicated possible limited functional health literacy; and a score less than two indicated that the participant had a large (> 50%) chance of having inadequate health literacy skills [
42].
Transcriptions of all IDIs and FGDs were checked for accuracy by the lead author. Braun and Clark’s [
45] method of thematic analysis was used to identify patterns and themes across the transcripts. The transcripts were read repeatedly and thoroughly, initial codes generated and organised into general themes which were then reviewed, defined and named in an inductive process [
45,
46]. The NVivo10 program was used to code transcripts. LB1 coded all transcripts, and PA coded several. Both authors discussed identified themes and subthemes for the final analysis. Data from IDIs and FGDs were compared, as were data from pregnant versus breastfeeding women. The data from the whole sample were analysed together because there were no evident differences. Confidentiality was ensured by de-identifying transcripts and assigning pseudonyms to participants.
Discussion
This study aimed to identify factors that impact pregnant or breastfeeding women’s decisions to take or not to take CMPs. The factors centre on how well women could access and understand information on CMPs, and how they assessed the quality of the information they gathered. The participants’ high health literacy levels are a limitation in this study, and may reflect the self-selected sampling and help explain their complex information-seeking and decision-making processes. However, it is useful to discuss health literacy and decision-making further. Fundamental to the factors involved in these women’s decisions to take, or not to take, a CMP were their health literacy levels, their use of multiple information sources, and their assessment of information gathered during their decision-making.
The ability to seek out, appraise and understand health information is essential to good health literacy [
27]. People with higher levels of education, income, and health literacy are more likely to search for health information [
9] than other members of the population. Previous research has found higher education and current employment to be significantly correlated with CMP use in pregnancy by Australian women [
1]. It is not surprising then, that the participants in this study were active health information seekers, as their demographic profile matches both what is known about Australian women who use CMPs in pregnancy [
11,
31,
49], and what is known about people who actively engage in health information-seeking behaviours.
Another component of good health literacy demonstrated by participants in this study, was communicative health literacy, the ability to discuss collated health information with HCPs in order to apply relevant information to decision-making regarding their own, and their unborn or breastfeeding babies’ health [
33,
50]. Constructive discussions of health information between patients and HCPs is considered a core component of shared decision-making [
9]. In turn, shared decision-making can increase patient satisfaction if consumers believe they are fully informed and involved in their treatments [
51], and improves the quality of the decision-making process and the consistency between patients’ values and choices [
52]. However, as noted earlier, most of the participants wanted more comprehensive CMPs information than their HCPs provided, and so searched further to answer questions regarding the safety profiles and possible benefits of CMPs. Previous research has noted that many biomedical HCPs may not feel adequately informed to discuss complementary medicine with their patients [
53], simply do not ask about CMP use [
49,
54,
55], or discussion does not occur because women do not disclose CMP use, because they do not think it necessary [
56] or because they worry that these HCPs will react negatively [
14,
32,
53,
54]. It may be that some of the women’s biomedical HCPs were not adequately informed about CMPs, and so were unable to provide the amount of comprehensive information that the participants wanted. Conversely, the health information-seeking behaviours of this unique sample may simply illustrate their high health literacy skills.
The transition to motherhood begins at an early stage in pregnancy, with women being acutely aware of possible threats to their pregnancies and continues through the postpartum period [
52] where women will make health care decisions that incorporate considerations of their breastfed infants’ safety [
17]. The active information-seeking by participants in the present study reflects both their acute concern for the health of their unborn and breastfeeding babies, and their high health literacy levels. Information-seeking behaviours are associated with various outcomes including consumers wishing to increase their knowledge of treatment options and to discuss the results of their searches with their health care providers [
9,
57], self-diagnosis, high self-efficacy with regards to self-management of health [
58], and intentionally choosing between different health options [
59]. Again, the reiterative collation and assessment of CMPs information shown in this study (Fig.
2) is an example of this, as women actively evaluated possible benefits and harms of CMPs in order to play an active role in their health care and make informed health care decisions.
Higher health literacy is also associated with seeking and using a number of information sources rather than relying solely on health care practitioners to provide information on health and health care choices [
57], as was demonstrated in this study (Table
3). Use of multiple information sources to gather information on medications has been noted internationally [
60] and in general Australian consumers [
57]. Studies of maternal health care show that women most commonly access health care practitioners for information on pharmaceutical and complementary medicines, and general health information [
57,
60‐
62]. Lay sources (e.g. family members, friends, or pregnant or breastfeeding peers) are accessed for information on remedies to treat everyday health challenges and for emotional support [
57], possibly due to shared cultural knowledge and norms [
61]. The Internet is a frequently accessed resource [
60,
61], but is mainly used to supplement, rather than provide alternate advice to that given by women’s health care practitioners [
57]. Concerns have been raised regarding the reliability, accuracy and currency of information pregnant women may find on the Internet and use to support their health [
63,
64]. Women in the present study recognised the need to be discerning when assessing information accessed via the Internet or social media, choosing to combine information found online with information from other mothers, HCPs and their own knowledge. Very little research has been published regarding mothers’ use of the Internet to find breastfeeding information and support [
65,
66]. Other research however has also shown that women are cautious regarding the reliability of pregnancy information found on the Internet, preferring consistency of information across multiple sites [
63,
67], or information that was linked to institutional websites and referenced scientific studies [
63,
67].
It is well-known that the receipt of poor quality or easily misunderstood health information can negatively influence consumers’ health care decisions [
27,
68]. The participants’ preference for plain language on labels, written instructions and in verbal information received when purchasing CMPs confirms plain language is more easily understood than technical or medical information that uses jargon, acronyms or unnecessary words [
27,
51]. Plain language is recommended in Australian [
27] and international [
51,
69] guidelines to improve consumers’ health literacy. Product labels and written information provided with a product need to be relevant to consumers, readable and appropriate if consumers are going to be able to use CMPs safely and effectively [
70]. Women in this study wanted comprehensive written information to be supplied with their CMPs.
Also evident from this small study, was that participants were not always satisfied with the amount of information they found on labels and packaging and often searched more widely before making final decisions about a CMP. Women did appreciate receiving written CMPs information from their health care practitioners. Health care practitioners could possibly mitigate women’s needs to search widely for CMPs information by becoming familiar with, and knowledgeable about CMPs commonly used in pregnancy and lactation, including where to find evidence-based information. Providing comprehensive written information in plain language when recommending or providing CMPs to their patients [
71] and initiating open, non-judgemental discussions with women regarding CMP use in pregnancy and lactation would also help facilitate women’s decision-making. Regarding women’s frequent use of the Internet to find health information, it may also be prudent for health care practitioners to guide women toward online resources linked to government, hospital or other respected health organisations [
67]. This would both acknowledge and support women’s right to autonomy and involvement in health care choices while also helping them find reputable Internet resources.
Assessing the quality of information during the decision-making process
The reiterative process of collating and assessing information noted in this study described not only the types of CMPs information pregnant or breastfeeding women wanted, but also how they assessed the quality of information received. It is difficult to compare this result with other research on CMP use in pregnancy and lactation as the ways mothers evaluate CMPs information is not well established. Most studies focus on the range of professional and lay information sources women access and encourage biomedical health care practitioners to ensure their patients receive scientifically validated information on CMPs (e.g. see [
31,
72]). Future research could further investigate how women specifically evaluate and assess the quality of CMPs information received from health care practitioners, lay and Internet sources.
Strengths and limitations
The participants were comparatively homogenous concerning education, income, English proficiency and health literacy levels. However, this can be considered both a strength and a limitation. The participants were highly health literate and so the data gathered is not representative of the full spectrum of health literacy levels. Additionally, nearly half the participants were health care professionals, which also influenced the health literacy of the sample. Although qualitative research is not intended to be generalised outside the study sample population, further research with women with lower health literacy levels is needed. However, the high health literacy of the participants is also a strength of this study, when considering how well the demographic profile of the participants matches what has been previously shown about typical Australian women who use CMPs in pregnancy [
11,
31]. There may be problems finding Australian mothers with lower health literacy levels who use CMPs in pregnancy and lactation. Using a highly educated, health literate sample has generated in-depth insights into the information-seeking of these women who use CMPs in pregnancy and lactation.
Implications for practice and future research
Health care practitioners need to be aware of the breadth of information sources pregnant and breastfeeding women will utilise when deciding whether to use a CMP. To have positive interactions with pregnant and breastfeeding women who use CMPs, HCPs would also benefit from learning about commonly used CMPs, including being able to adequately address women’s identified information needs concerning whether possible benefits or safety concerns can be identified. Being able to provide clear and comprehensive information, and to direct women to reputable online resources, as discussed above, would also be of benefit to HCPs’ professional practice skills, and the women for whom they care.
Future research needs to investigate whether women with lower health literacy levels use CMPs in pregnancy and lactation, and if so, whether similar factors influence their decision-making. Additionally, while this study did include four women who identified as being from non-English speaking backgrounds (Table
2), further research with Australian women from more varied language and cultural backgrounds is also warranted, and would be more reflective of the diverse Australian population.
Conclusions
This study showed that participants’ high health literacy levels led them to engage in reiterative, information-seeking processes fuelled by the need to find clear information before making the decision to take, or not to take, a CMP. Two main factors influenced women’s decisions: 1) how well they understood information gathered on CMPs; and 2) how they assessed the quality of the information collated, including how they used this to assess the quality of a CMP itself. Decisions to take a CMP depended on women perceiving a clear benefit to their baby or themselves, establishing safety of the CMP in pregnancy and breastfeeding, and perceptions of the CMPs information collated as good quality and from reputable sources. Conversely, final decisions not to take a CMP resulted when women could not identify an obvious benefit to taking a CMP, were unable to establish the safety of a CMP, and/or when they perceived CMPs information as poor quality, difficult to understand or coercive.
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.