Literature DB >> 21216789

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

A D Lyerly1, S Nakagawa, M Kuppermann.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Fertility patients often struggle with decisions about disposition of embryos remaining after fertility treatment. We aimed to identify predictors and correlates of decisional conflict among patients facing these decisions.
METHODS: We analyzed results from a survey of 2210 patients from nine geographically diverse US fertility clinics. The main outcome measure was decisional conflict about embryo disposition, as measured by the decisional conflict scale (DCS).
RESULTS: Of 1244 respondents who returned the survey, 1005 with cryopreserved embryos and DCS scores were included in the analysis. Of the respondents, 39% reported high decisional conflict (DCS ≥ 37.5). Thoughts about future childbearing were associated with high decisional conflict: respondents who were either uncertain about whether to have a baby in the future or sure they did not want to have a baby were at higher odds of high decisional conflict than participants who desired a baby [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 3.93, P < 0.001 and aOR = 1.69, P = 0.04, respectively]. Also associated with high decisional conflict were being likely to have embryos thawed and discarded (aOR = 2.08, P < 0.001), donated for research (aOR = 1.66, P = 0.01) or frozen 'forever' (aOR = 1.90, P = 0.01); being likely to choose compassionate transfer if it were available (aOR = 1.65, P = 0.03); attributing high, but not full, moral status to human embryos; not having enough information; and not being satisfied with the informed consent process.
CONCLUSIONS: Decisional conflict about frozen embryo disposition differs according to reproductive preferences that may vary according to stage of treatment. Informed consent for embryo disposition should be revisited periodically, with serious discussions about disposition after childbearing is complete.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21216789      PMCID: PMC3037793          DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deq368

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Reprod        ISSN: 0268-1161            Impact factor:   6.918


  13 in total

1.  Embryonic stem cells. Willingness to donate frozen embryos for stem cell research.

Authors:  Anne Drapkin Lyerly; Ruth R Faden
Journal:  Science       Date:  2007-06-21       Impact factor: 47.728

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

Authors:  Robert D Nachtigall; Kirstin Mac Dougall; Matthew Lee; Jennifer Harrington; Gay Becker
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2010-04-01       Impact factor: 7.329

3.  Validation of a decisional conflict scale.

Authors:  A M O'Connor
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1995 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 2.583

4.  Parent identity and 'virtual' children: why patients discard rather than donate unused embryos.

Authors:  Sheryl de Lacey
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2005-03-10       Impact factor: 6.918

5.  Factors that affect infertility patients' decisions about disposition of frozen embryos.

Authors:  Anne Drapkin Lyerly; Karen Steinhauser; Emily Namey; James A Tulsky; Robert Cook-Deegan; Jeremy Sugarman; David Walmer; Ruth Faden; Edward Wallach
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2006-05-04       Impact factor: 7.329

6.  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

7.  How to facilitate decisions about surplus embryos: patients' views.

Authors:  Giuliana Fuscaldo; Sarah Russell; Lynn Gillam
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 6.918

8.  Validation of a decision regret scale.

Authors:  Jamie C Brehaut; Annette M O'Connor; Timothy J Wood; Thomas F Hack; Laura Siminoff; Elisa Gordon; Deb Feldman-Stewart
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2003 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.583

Review 9.  Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.

Authors:  Annette M O'Connor; Carol L Bennett; Dawn Stacey; Michael Barry; Nananda F Col; Karen B Eden; Vikki A Entwistle; Valerie Fiset; Margaret Holmes-Rovner; Sara Khangura; Hilary Llewellyn-Thomas; David Rovner
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2009-07-08

10.  Decisions for the fate of frozen embryos: fresh insights into patients' thinking and their rationales for donating or discarding embryos.

Authors:  Sheryl de Lacey
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2007-04-07       Impact factor: 6.918

View more
  8 in total

1.  Decisional conflict among couples seeking specialty treatment for infertility in the USA: a longitudinal exploratory study.

Authors:  R Anguzu; R Cusatis; N Fergestrom; A Cooper; K D Schoyer; J B Davis; J Sandlow; K E Flynn
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2020-03-27       Impact factor: 6.918

2.  The fertilization-induced zinc spark is a novel biomarker of mouse embryo quality and early development.

Authors:  Nan Zhang; Francesca E Duncan; Emily L Que; Thomas V O'Halloran; Teresa K Woodruff
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-03-18       Impact factor: 4.379

3.  A patient-centred approach to embryo donation for research.

Authors:  Catarina Samorinha; Susana Silva
Journal:  Isr J Health Policy Res       Date:  2016-11-07

4.  Frozen in perpetuity: 'abandoned embryos' in Canada.

Authors:  Alana Cattapan; Françoise Baylis
Journal:  Reprod Biomed Soc Online       Date:  2016-05-12

5.  Excluding indigenous bioethical concerns when regulating frozen embryo storage: An Aotearoa New Zealand case study.

Authors:  Ruth P Fitzgerald; Michael Legge; Poia Rewi; Ella J Robinson
Journal:  Reprod Biomed Soc Online       Date:  2019-02-14

6.  A survey of Italian physicians' opinion about stem cells research: what doctors prefer and what the law requires.

Authors:  Paola Frati; Matteo Gulino; Arianna Pacchiarotti; Stefano D'Errico; Lorella Sicuro; Vittorio Fineschi
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2014-04-30       Impact factor: 3.411

Review 7.  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

8.  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
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.