The effect of mHealth and conventional awareness campaigns on caregivers’ developmental literacy

Abstract

Abstract Introduction Early childhood development (ECD) should be monitored closely as unattained early milestones are one of the first signs of possible developmental delay. In low-middle income countries, children in impoverished households face a multitude of risk factors that may impact ECD. Compromised ECD can lead to negative outcomes, the continuation of the intergenerational cycle of poverty and reduced educational and vocational opportunities. Increased developmental monitoring from caregivers can counter the effects of risk factors. Developmental literacy is the knowledge and beliefs about child development that can aid in early recognition and support of children with developmental delays. Increased developmental literacy supports positive parenting thus improving ECD outcomes. This study aimed to determine the effect of mHealth and conventional awareness campaigns on caregivers’ developmental literacy.

Method Caregivers were recruited from a primary health care facility in a low-resourced setting. Once participants consented, caregivers’ developmental literacy was assessed using the Knowledge of Infant Development Inventory (KIDI), prior to their exposure to awareness campaigns. The participants were randomly divided into three groups; two intervention groups (mHealth and conventional awareness campaigns) and a control group. mHealth participants received SMS’s once a week over a course of three months. The conventional awareness group participants received the same information but, in a pamphlet, given at the initial interview. Participants were reassessed after three months. The KIDI was performed again to evaluate possible changes in developmental literacy post exposure to the awareness campaigns.

Results and discussion Results showed that neither awareness campaign was more effective (p=.359); as intervention groups’ results were similar to those of the control group. There was a significant improvement (p=.000), from pre-test to post-test, across the entire sample (n= 127). Improvements may be due to pre-test face-to-face interviews with caregivers. This approach may be more effective than awareness campaigns in improving development literacy.

Conclusion It appears that in the current study, neither awareness campaign is more effective than the other. Due to the lack of statistical significance in the score between the mHealth and conventional awareness campaigns. Further research is needed to evaluate the effectivity of face-to-face interviews in improving developmental literacy. The importance of ECD should not be underestimated and thus determining the most effective way of improving developmental literacy is vital to the future of children from LMIC.