Joseph B Stanford1, Ken R Smith, Michael W Varner. 1. Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Creighton Model FertilityCare System (CrMS) teaches women to identify days when intercourse is likely to result in pregnancy. We sought to assess the impact of the CrMS on time to pregnancy (TTP), via per-cycle pregnancy rates (fecundability). METHODS: We conducted a parallel randomised trial at the University of Utah School of Medicine, 2003-06. Women ages 18-35 years, in a relationship of proven fertility, who desired to conceive, were block-randomised and stratified for age, with allocation concealment by opaque sequentially numbered sealed envelopes. The control group received the advice to have intercourse 2-3 times per week, and the intervention group received CrMS instruction. All women were asked to begin trying to conceive starting the second cycle in the study and were followed actively up to seven cycles, without blinding of research personnel. We calculated descriptive statistics and fecundability, and estimated Cox models for TTP. (Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00161395). RESULTS: There were 143 women randomised: 71 to the control group (all analysed) and 72 to the CrMS group (69 analysed). The adjusted hazard ratio for the influence of CrMS on TTP was 0.86 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.53, 1.38]. Fecundability in cycles with intent to conceive was 31% in controls and 36% with CrMS (P = 0.32). By the first cycle, fecundability was 17% in controls, and 4% with CrMS (P = 0.02). No adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: We found no significant impact of CrMS on TTP or fecundability, but fewer of the women receiving CrMS conceived by the first cycle.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The Creighton Model FertilityCare System (CrMS) teaches women to identify days when intercourse is likely to result in pregnancy. We sought to assess the impact of the CrMS on time to pregnancy (TTP), via per-cycle pregnancy rates (fecundability). METHODS: We conducted a parallel randomised trial at the University of Utah School of Medicine, 2003-06. Women ages 18-35 years, in a relationship of proven fertility, who desired to conceive, were block-randomised and stratified for age, with allocation concealment by opaque sequentially numbered sealed envelopes. The control group received the advice to have intercourse 2-3 times per week, and the intervention group received CrMS instruction. All women were asked to begin trying to conceive starting the second cycle in the study and were followed actively up to seven cycles, without blinding of research personnel. We calculated descriptive statistics and fecundability, and estimated Cox models for TTP. (Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00161395). RESULTS: There were 143 women randomised: 71 to the control group (all analysed) and 72 to the CrMS group (69 analysed). The adjusted hazard ratio for the influence of CrMS on TTP was 0.86 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.53, 1.38]. Fecundability in cycles with intent to conceive was 31% in controls and 36% with CrMS (P = 0.32). By the first cycle, fecundability was 17% in controls, and 4% with CrMS (P = 0.02). No adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: We found no significant impact of CrMS on TTP or fecundability, but fewer of the women receiving CrMS conceived by the first cycle.
Authors: Jamie L Bigelow; David B Dunson; Joseph B Stanford; René Ecochard; Christian Gnoth; Bernardo Colombo Journal: Hum Reprod Date: 2004-02-27 Impact factor: 6.918
Authors: Kay Johnson; Samuel F Posner; Janis Biermann; José F Cordero; Hani K Atrash; Christopher S Parker; Sheree Boulet; Michele G Curtis Journal: MMWR Recomm Rep Date: 2006-04-21
Authors: A J Wilcox; Donna Day Baird; David B Dunson; D Robert McConnaughey; James S Kesner; Clarice R Weinberg Journal: Hum Reprod Date: 2004-06-09 Impact factor: 6.918
Authors: A J Wilcox; C R Weinberg; J F O'Connor; D D Baird; J P Schlatterer; R E Canfield; E G Armstrong; B C Nisula Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1988-07-28 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Jihye Park; Joseph B Stanford; Christina A Porucznik; Kylie Christensen; Karen C Schliep Journal: Psychoneuroendocrinology Date: 2019-09-16 Impact factor: 4.905
Authors: Joseph B Stanford; Sydney K Willis; Elizabeth E Hatch; Kenneth J Rothman; Lauren A Wise Journal: Hum Reprod Date: 2020-10-01 Impact factor: 6.918
Authors: Eric B Laber; Ying-Qi Zhao; Todd Regh; Marie Davidian; Anastasios Tsiatis; Joseph B Stanford; Donglin Zeng; Rui Song; Michael R Kosorok Journal: Stat Med Date: 2015-10-28 Impact factor: 2.373
Authors: Christina A Porucznik; Kyley J Cox; Karen C Schliep; Diana G Wilkins; Joseph B Stanford Journal: Environ Health Date: 2016-06-08 Impact factor: 5.984
Authors: Emily W Harville; Gita D Mishra; Edwina Yeung; Sunni L Mumford; Enrique F Schisterman; Anne Marie Jukic; Elizabeth E Hatch; Ellen M Mikkelsen; Hong Jiang; Deborah B Ehrenthal; Christina A Porucznik; Joseph B Stanford; Shi-Wu Wen; Alysha Harvey; Danielle Symons Downs; Chittaranjan Yajnik; Donna Santillan; Mark Santillan; Thomas F McElrath; Jessica G Woo; Elaine M Urbina; Jorge E Chavarro; Daniela Sotres-Alvarez; Lydia Bazzano; Jun Zhang; Anne Steiner; Erica P Gunderson; Lauren A Wise Journal: Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol Date: 2019-10-28 Impact factor: 3.980