Literature DB >> 20359706

What do patients want? Expectations and perceptions of IVF clinic information and support regarding frozen embryo disposition.

Robert D Nachtigall1, Kirstin Mac Dougall, Matthew Lee, Jennifer Harrington, Gay Becker.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To describe frozen embryo holders' expectations and perceptions of IVF clinic information, support, and storage fees and their relevance to embryo disposition decision making.
DESIGN: Qualitative interview study.
SETTING: Three northern California IVF practices. PATIENT(S): One hundred six families (110 women and 74 men) with an average of six frozen embryos in storage for 5 years. INTERVENTION(S): Three in-depth interviews over 1 year. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Thematic analysis of interview transcripts. RESULT(S): Although embryo holders expected that IVF clinics were under obligation to assist in the disposition decision and would be their main source of information, these expectations did not become manifest until years after embryo cryopreservation. Patients expressed a variety of preferences for the timing, format, and content of information and support, ranging from detailed written information to counselor/advocates that could provide logistical guidance and/or psychologic support. Embryo holders perceived an insufficiently defined infrastructure to facilitate donation to other couples, whereas donating to medical research was seen as less complicated and more likely to be encouraged and supported by physicians and clinics. Although increasing storage fees motivated disposition decision making, they could be interpreted as coercive and/or not reflective of actual clinic costs. CONCLUSION(S): Frozen embryo-holding patients' expectations of information and support to assist them with disposition decision making and embryo donation suggests that IVF clinics may benefit from a review of their frozen embryo counseling, storage, and disposition policies and procedures.
Copyright © 2010 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20359706      PMCID: PMC2965265          DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.02.023

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Fertil Steril        ISSN: 0015-0282            Impact factor:   7.329


  31 in total

1.  The disposition of unused frozen embryos.

Authors:  S C Klock; S Sheinin; R R Kazer
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2001-07-05       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  Impact of implementation of an embryo storage fee on embryo disposal activity.

Authors:  R G Brzyski; P A Binkley; J D Pierce; C A Eddy
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 7.329

3.  Users' guides to the medical literature: XXIII. Qualitative research in health care A. Are the results of the study valid? Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group.

Authors:  M K Giacomini; D J Cook
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2000-07-19       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Embryo donation for medical research: attitudes and concerns of potential donors.

Authors:  Catherine A McMahon; Frances L Gibson; Garth I Leslie; Douglas M Saunders; Katherine A Porter; Christopher C Tennant
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 6.918

5.  Factors influencing the decision to use or discard cryopreserved embryos.

Authors:  A S Svanberg; J Boivin; T Bergh
Journal:  Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 3.636

6.  Embryo donation: outcome and attitudes among embryo donors and recipients.

Authors:  V Söderström-Anttila; T Foudila; U R Ripatti; R Siegberg
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 6.918

7.  How couples who have undergone in vitro fertilization decide what to do with surplus frozen embryos.

Authors:  Robert D Nachtigall; Kirstin Mac Dougall; Jennifer Harrington; Julia Duff; Matthew Lee; Gay Becker
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2009-08-22       Impact factor: 7.329

8.  Embryo donation at an Australian university in-vitro fertilisation clinic: issues and outcomes.

Authors:  Gabor T Kovacs; Sue A Breheny; Melinda J Dear
Journal:  Med J Aust       Date:  2003-02-03       Impact factor: 7.738

9.  Patient attitudes to donation of embryos for research in Western Australia.

Authors:  Peter J Burton; Katherine Sanders
Journal:  Med J Aust       Date:  2004-06-07       Impact factor: 7.738

10.  Fertility patients' views about frozen embryo disposition: results of a multi-institutional U.S. survey.

Authors:  Anne Drapkin Lyerly; Karen Steinhauser; Corrine Voils; Emily Namey; Carolyn Alexander; Brandon Bankowski; Robert Cook-Deegan; William C Dodson; Elena Gates; Emily S Jungheim; Peter G McGovern; Evan R Myers; Barbara Osborn; William Schlaff; Jeremy Sugarman; James A Tulsky; David Walmer; Ruth R Faden; Edward Wallach
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2008-12-05       Impact factor: 7.329

View more
  9 in total

1.  Fifteen year follow-up of embryos cryopreserved in cancer patients for fertility preservation.

Authors:  J Barcroft; N Dayoub; K J Thong
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2013-07-09       Impact factor: 3.412

Review 2.  The state of "freeze-for-all" in human ARTs.

Authors:  Natalia Basile; Juan A Garcia-Velasco
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2016-09-14       Impact factor: 3.412

3.  Decisional conflict and the disposition of frozen embryos: implications for informed consent.

Authors:  A D Lyerly; S Nakagawa; M Kuppermann
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2011-01-07       Impact factor: 6.918

Review 4.  Oocyte, embryo and blastocyst cryopreservation in ART: systematic review and meta-analysis comparing slow-freezing versus vitrification to produce evidence for the development of global guidance.

Authors:  Laura Rienzi; Clarisa Gracia; Roberta Maggiulli; Andrew R LaBarbera; Daniel J Kaser; Filippo M Ubaldi; Sheryl Vanderpoel; Catherine Racowsky
Journal:  Hum Reprod Update       Date:  2017-03-01       Impact factor: 15.610

5.  Embryo donation: Survey of in-vitro fertilization (IVF) patients and randomized trial of complimentary counseling.

Authors:  Alison E Zimon; Donald S Shepard; Jeffrey Prottas; Kristin L Rooney; Jeanie Ungerleider; Yara A Halasa-Rappel; Denny Sakkas; Selwyn P Oskowitz
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-08-15       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Evaluation of the effect of the elective blastocyst-stage embryo transfer and freezing strategy on the abandonment of frozen embryos under the Taiwan National Assisted Reproduction Act.

Authors:  Kuo-Chung Lan; Ya-Jung Tseng; Yi-Ru Su; Tzu-Yu Lin; Yi-Chi Lin
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2020-01-28       Impact factor: 3.412

7.  Patients' attitudes towards the surplus frozen embryos in China.

Authors:  Xuan Jin; GongXian Wang; SiSun Liu; Ming Liu; Jing Zhang; YuFa Shi
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2012-12-26       Impact factor: 3.411

Review 8.  Final destination of surplus cryopreserved embryos. What decision should be made?

Authors:  Carlos Wilson Dala Paula Abreu Abreu; Maria Lúcia Andrade Abreu; Maria Mariana Andrade Abreu; João Pedro Andrade Abreu; Luiz Fernando Cal Silva; Ines Katerina Damasceno Cavallo Cruzeiro; Rui Manuel Lopes Nunes
Journal:  JBRA Assist Reprod       Date:  2021-04-27

9.  Embryo cryopreservation and utilization in the United States from 2004-2013.

Authors:  Mindy S Christianson; Judy E Stern; Fangbai Sun; Heping Zhang; Aaron K Styer; Wendy Vitek; Alex J Polotsky
Journal:  F S Rep       Date:  2020-09-28
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.