Factors and perceptions that influence women's decisions to have a single embryo transferred

被引:24
作者
de lacey, S. [1 ]
Davies, M.
Homan, G.
Briggs, N.
Norman, R. J.
机构
[1] Univ Adelaide, Sch Paediat & Reprod Hlth, Res Ctr Reprod Hlth, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia
[2] Repromed, Dulwich, Australia
[3] Univ Adelaide, Data Management & Anal Ctr, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia
关键词
decision-making; in-vitro fertilization; patient counselling; single embryo transfer;
D O I
10.1016/S1472-6483(10)60384-7
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
The aim of this study was to identify factors that inhibit or promote the adoption of single embryo transfer (SET). A cohort of 163 women patients receiving IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection treatment, comprising 87 women choosing SET and 63 women choosing double embryo transfer (DET), were interviewed using a structured questionnaire. The data were compared using logistic regression analysis. Confidence in the chance of pregnancy with SET, younger age and first treatment were predictive of a decision for SET. Preference for a healthy and singleton pregnancy was predictive but perceptions of the incidence or risk of multiple gestation were not. Factors such as a sense of time urgency and past experience of treatment were significant and predictive of diminished choice of SET. The clinic doctor was an important influencing factor. The results of this study confirm that improved pregnancy rates in SET coupled with an official clinic policy to promote SET in younger, first cycle patients influenced many women to choose SET. However, repeated treatment, advancing age and urgency to become pregnant are factors that moderate a woman's choice for SET.
引用
收藏
页码:526 / 531
页数:6
相关论文
共 26 条
[1]   Multiple births from assisted reproductive technologies: a challenge that must be met [J].
Adamson, D ;
Baker, V .
FERTILITY AND STERILITY, 2004, 81 (03) :517-522
[2]   Is twin pregnancy necessarily an adverse outcome of assisted reproductive technologies? [J].
Belaisch-Allart, Joelle .
HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 2007, 22 (05) :1495-1495
[3]   What is the most relevant standard of success in assisted reproduction? Redefining success in the context of elective single embryo transfer: evidence, intuition and financial reality [J].
Bhattacharya, S ;
Templeton, A .
HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 2004, 19 (09) :1939-1942
[4]   The couple's decision-making in IVF: one or two embryos at transfer? [J].
Blennborn, M ;
Nilsson, S ;
Hillervik, C ;
Hellberg, D .
HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 2005, 20 (05) :1292-1297
[5]   The desire for multiple pregnancy in male and female infertility patients [J].
Child, TJ ;
Henderson, AM ;
Tan, SL .
HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 2004, 19 (03) :558-561
[6]   Embryo transfer: one or two? [J].
Cohen, Jean .
REPRODUCTIVE BIOMEDICINE ONLINE, 2006, 12 (05) :644-645
[7]  
Crosignani PG, 2000, HUM REPROD, V15, P1856
[8]   Impact of patients' choice for single embryo transfer of a top quality embryo versus double embryo transfer in the first IVF/ICSI cycle [J].
De Neubourg, D ;
Mangelschots, K ;
Van Royen, E ;
Vercruyssen, M ;
Ryckaert, G ;
Valkenburg, M ;
Barudy-Vasquez, J ;
Gerris, J .
HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 2002, 17 (10) :2621-2625
[9]   A health-economic decision-analytic model comparing double with single embryo transfer in IVF/ICSI [J].
De Sutter, P ;
Gerris, J ;
Dhont, M .
HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 2002, 17 (11) :2891-2896
[10]   Less is more: the risks of multiple births [J].
Elster, N .
FERTILITY AND STERILITY, 2000, 74 (04) :617-623