Implementing digital sexual and reproductive health care services in youth clinics: a qualitative study on perceived barriers and facilitators among midwives in Stockholm, Sweden.

BACKGROUND: Digital health care services have the potential to improve access to sexual and reproductive health care for youth but require substantial implementation efforts to translate into individual and public health gains. Health care providers are influential both regarding implementation and utilization of the services, and hence, their perceptions of digital health care services and the implementation process are essential to identify and address. The aim of this study was to explore midwives' perception of digital sexual and reproductive health care services for youth, and to identify perceived barriers and facilitators of the implementation of digital health care provision in youth clinics. METHODS: We performed semi-structured interviews with midwives (n = 16) working at youth clinics providing both on-site and digital sexual and reproductive health care services to youth in Stockholm, Sweden. Interview data were analyzed using a content analysis approach guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). RESULTS: Midwives acknowledged that the implementation of digital health care improved the overall access and timeliness of the services at youth clinics. The ability to accommodate the needs of youth regarding their preferred meeting environment (digital or on-site) and easy access to follow-up consultations were identified as benefits of digital health care. Challenges to provide digital health care included communication barriers, privacy and confidentiality concerns, time constraints, inability to offer digital appointments for social counselling, and midwives' preference for in person consultations. Experiencing organizational support during the implementation was appreciated but varied between the respondents. CONCLUSION: Digital sexual and reproductive health care services could increase access and are valuable complements to on-site services in youth clinics. Sufficient training for midwives and organizational support are crucial to ensure high quality health care. Privacy and safety concerns for the youth might aggravate implementation of digital health care. Future research could focus on equitable access and youth' perceptions of digital health care services for sexual and reproductive health.

The MOSEXY trial: mobile phone intervention for sexual health in youth-a pragmatic randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effect of a smartphone application on sexual health in youth in Stockholm, Sweden.

An estimated 350 million cases of STIs occur globally each year. In Sweden, Chlamydia is the most common STI with approximately 30 000 cases annually, disproportionally affecting youth. National surveys report low condom use among youth. Smartphone coverage is high among this tech-savvy group. In collaboration with youth, we developed an interactive smartphone application comprising games, peer experiences and information snippets to promote condom use. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate in a randomised controlled trial, the effectiveness of this smartphone application to improve condom use among youth in Stockholm, Sweden. METHODS: This two-arm, individually randomised controlled trial was implemented through the Youth Health Clinics (YHC) in Stockholm, Sweden. Youth aged 18-23 years, who owned a smartphone and had ≥2 sexual partners during the past 6 months were eligible. The intervention delivered the interactive elements described above over 180 days. The control group received a 'dummy' application. Both groups received standard of care at the YHC. The primary outcome was proportion of consistent (100%) self-reported condom use at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included self-reported number of partners, occurrence of STIs/pregnancy and STI tests during the study period. An intention-to-treat approach was used. RESULTS: 214 and 219 youth were randomised to the intervention and control groups, respectively. Consistent condom use was reported for 32/214 (15.0%) in the intervention group and for 35/219 (16.0%) in the control group (OR 0.9, 95% CI 0.5 to 1.6). No significant differences in secondary outcomes were seen. CONCLUSION: We were unable to detect an effect of the intervention. Future research should focus on targeting different subgroups within the overall risk group, with tailored mHealth interventions. The potential for such interventions in settings where sexual health services are unavailable should be evaluated. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN13212899.