Literature DB >> 33575856

Assessing the quality of decision-making for planned oocyte cryopreservation.

Samantha Yee1, Carly V Goodman2, Vivian Fu2, Nechama J Lipton2,3, Michal Dviri2,4, Jordana Mashiach2,4, Clifford L Librach2,4,5,6.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: This survey study aims to examine the quality of planned oocyte cryopreservation (POC) decision-making in the domains of decision change, decision difficulty, decision regret and informed choice.
METHODS: Of the 224 women who completed at least one POC cycle between 2012 and 2018 at a Canadian academic IVF centre, 198 were reachable by email for anonymous survey participation.
RESULTS: Ninety-eight questionnaires were returned (response rate 49.5%). Of these, 86 fully completed questionnaires were analyzed for this study. Eighty-eight percent of respondents stated that it was a 'good decision' to cryopreserve oocytes, in retrospect. Despite this, 31% found the decision-making process to be 'difficult'. Three in five (61%) would have made 'exactly the same' decision without any change, yet slightly over a third (35%) would have made a 'similar' decision, but with option-related changes and process-related changes. A negative correlation between 'decision regret' and 'informed choice' was found (p < .005). Those who stated that they would have made exactly the 'same' POC decision were found to have a significantly higher 'informed choice' score compared to others who would have made a 'similar' or 'completely different' decision, in retrospect (p < .001). Respondents with lesser 'decision regret' were significantly more likely to appraise their decision as a well-informed choice (p < .001).
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show that high-quality POC decision-making is accompanied by the perception of being able to make an informed choice, which can be achieved by providing patients with adequate information and individualized counselling to help patients set realistic expectations of cycle outcomes.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Assisted reproduction; Fertility preservation; Oocyte cryopreservation; Planned egg freezing; Planned oocyte cryopreservation; Social egg freezing

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33575856      PMCID: PMC8079493          DOI: 10.1007/s10815-021-02103-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet        ISSN: 1058-0468            Impact factor:   3.412


  34 in total

1.  Attitudes towards new assisted reproductive technologies in Sweden: a survey in women 30-39 years of age.

Authors:  Anna-Lena Wennberg; Kenny A Rodriguez-Wallberg; Ian Milsom; Mats Brännström
Journal:  Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand       Date:  2015-10-19       Impact factor: 3.636

2.  Medical and social egg freezing: internet-based survey of knowledge and attitudes among women in Denmark and the UK.

Authors:  Camille Lallemant; Ditte Vassard; Anders Nyboe Andersen; Lone Schmidt; Nick Macklon
Journal:  Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand       Date:  2016-11-05       Impact factor: 3.636

3.  Egg freezing for age-related fertility decline: preventive medicine or a further medicalization of reproduction? Analyzing the new Israeli policy.

Authors:  Shiri Shkedi-Rafid; Yael Hashiloni-Dolev
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2011-07-01       Impact factor: 7.329

4.  ANZSREI consensus statement on elective oocyte cryopreservation.

Authors:  Raelia Lew; Jinny Foo; Ben Kroon; Clare Boothroyd; Michael Chapman
Journal:  Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  2019-07-22       Impact factor: 2.100

5.  Public support in the United States for elective oocyte cryopreservation.

Authors:  Erin I Lewis; Stacey A Missmer; Leslie V Farland; Elizabeth S Ginsburg
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2016-07-26       Impact factor: 7.329

6.  No. 356-Egg Freezing for Age-Related Fertility Decline.

Authors:  Julio Saumet; Angel Petropanagos; Karen Buzaglo; Eileen McMahon; Gunwant Warraich; Neal Mahutte
Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol Can       Date:  2017-12-06

7.  Assessing reproductive choices of women and the likelihood of oocyte cryopreservation in the era of elective oocyte freezing.

Authors:  Lauren W Milman; Suneeta Senapati; Mary D Sammel; Katherine D Cameron; Clarisa Gracia
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 7.329

8.  Elective oocyte cryopreservation: who should pay?

Authors:  Heidi Mertes; Guido Pennings
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2011-11-13       Impact factor: 6.918

9.  A survey on the intentions and attitudes towards oocyte cryopreservation for non-medical reasons among women of reproductive age.

Authors:  D Stoop; J Nekkebroeck; P Devroey
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2011-01-05       Impact factor: 6.918

10.  Fertility awareness online: the efficacy of a fertility education website in increasing knowledge and changing fertility beliefs.

Authors:  J C Daniluk; E Koert
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2014-12-05       Impact factor: 6.918

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.