Literature DB >> 16080011

Why do couples refuse or discontinue ART?

A A Dawson1, K Diedrich, R E Felberbaum.   

Abstract

The first child born after in-vitro fertilisation, (IVF)-treatment, just passed its 26th birthday in July 2004. Since that birth-assisted reproduction techniques (ART) became a practicable technology, they had been used all over the world, and more than 2 million children were born after IVF-treatment. Despite all success in this field, ART is neither accepted nor used for all infertile couples, although this might be the only possibility of becoming pregnant. Two different kinds of ART refusal are distinguishable: the primary refusal being for financial, psychosocial, moral, ethical and medical reasons including the risk of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome, the risk of multiple pregnancies and the risk of malformations. The secondary refusal includes dropouts after one or more unsuccessful IVF-treatments mainly influenced by the outcome of previous cycles (prognostic factors: oocyte and embryo count, embryo quality, females age) associated with psychological and emotional aspects. However, financial factors seem to be the most potent reasons for ART-refusal.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16080011     DOI: 10.1007/s00404-005-0010-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet        ISSN: 0932-0067            Impact factor:   2.344


  8 in total

1.  A clinical counseling tool predicting supernumerary embryos after a fresh IVF cycle.

Authors:  Yetunde Ibrahim; Greg Stoddard; Erica Johnstone
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2020-03-09       Impact factor: 3.412

2.  Factors associated with early in vitro fertilization treatment discontinuation.

Authors:  Bronwyn S Bedrick; Kelsey Anderson; Darcy E Broughton; Barton Hamilton; Emily S Jungheim
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2019-04-28       Impact factor: 7.329

3.  Disinvestment policy and the public funding of assisted reproductive technologies: outcomes of deliberative engagements with three key stakeholder groups.

Authors:  Katherine Hodgetts; Janet E Hiller; Jackie M Street; Drew Carter; Annette J Braunack-Mayer; Amber M Watt; John R Moss; Adam G Elshaug
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2014-05-05       Impact factor: 2.655

4.  Perspectives of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) practitioners in the support and treatment of infertility.

Authors:  Erin O'Reilly; Marika Sevigny; Kelley-Anne Sabarre; Karen P Phillips
Journal:  BMC Complement Altern Med       Date:  2014-10-14       Impact factor: 3.659

Review 5.  Impact of in vitro fertilization state mandates for third party insurance coverage in the United States: a review and critical assessment.

Authors:  Benjamin J Peipert; Melissa N Montoya; Bronwyn S Bedrick; David B Seifer; Tarun Jain
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2022-08-04       Impact factor: 4.982

6.  Resource allocation of in vitro fertilization: a nationwide register-based cohort study.

Authors:  Reija Klemetti; Mika Gissler; Tiina Sevón; Elina Hemminki
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2007-12-21       Impact factor: 2.655

7.  Restraint stress inhibits mouse implantation: temporal window and the involvement of HB-EGF, estrogen and progesterone.

Authors:  Li-Hua Zhao; Xiang-Zhong Cui; Hong-Jie Yuan; Bo Liang; Liang-Liang Zheng; Yu-Xiang Liu; Ming-Jiu Luo; Jing-He Tan
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-11-14       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Demographic relevancy of increased use of assisted reproduction in European countries.

Authors:  Jirina Kocourkova; Boris Burcin; Tomas Kucera
Journal:  Reprod Health       Date:  2014-05-26       Impact factor: 3.223

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.