Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 6/2023

Open Access 14.04.2023 | Assisted Reproduction Technologies

Information and decision support needs: A survey of women interested in receiving planned oocyte cryopreservation information

verfasst von: Sherine Sandhu, Martha Hickey, Sabine Braat, Karin Hammarberg, Raelia Lew, Jane Fisher, William Ledger, Michelle Peate, on behalf of the Eggsurance Collaborative Group

Erschienen in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics | Ausgabe 6/2023

 Abstract

Purpose

Identifying the information and decision support needs of women interested in receiving planned oocyte cryopreservation (POC) information.

Methods

An online survey of Australian women, aged 18-45, interested in receiving POC information, proficient in English, with internet access. The survey covered POC information sources, information delivery preferences, POC and age-related infertility knowledge (study-specific scale), Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS), and time spent considering POC. Target sample size (n=120) was determined using a precision-based method.

Results

Of 332 participants, 249 (75%) had considered POC, whilst 83 (25%) had not. Over half (54%) had searched for POC information. Fertility clinic websites were predominately used (70%). Most (73%) believed women should receive POC information between ages 19-30 years. Preferred information providers were fertility specialists (85%) and primary care physicians (81%). Other methods rated most useful to deliver POC information were online. Mean knowledge score was 8.9/14 (SD:2.3). For participants who had considered POC, mean DCS score was 57.1/100 (SD:27.2) and 78% had high decisional conflict (score >37.5). In regression, lower DCS scores were associated with every 1-point increase in knowledge score (-2.4; 95% CI [-3.9, -0.8]), consulting an IVF specialist (-17.5; [-28.0, -7.1]), and making a POC decision (-18.4; [-27.5, -9.3]). Median time to decision was 24-months (IQR: 12.0-36.0) (n=53).

Conclusion

Women interested in receiving POC information had knowledge gaps, and wanted to be informed about the option by age 30 years from healthcare professionals and online resources. Most women who considered using POC had high decisional conflict indicating a need for decision support.
Begleitmaterial
Hinweise

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s10815-023-02796-x.

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Introduction

Uptake of oocyte cryopreservation is rapidly increasing in high-income countries [1, 2]. In the United States (US), the annual number of cycles performed grew from around 2,700 in 2012 to 13,800 in 2018 [1]. There are also reports of increased uptake and consideration of the technique resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic [36]. Oocyte cryopreservation was initially introduced as a fertility preservation method for patients needing gonadotoxic cancer treatment [7]. As data on the safety and efficacy of the technique improved, its experimental label was removed [8] and the option of ‘planned oocyte cryopreservation’ (POC) became more accessible for women concerned with future age-related infertility [9].
Planned oocyte cryopreservation decisions are complex, with several factors to consider including personal circumstances and values. For example, age at the time of POC is a key predictor of success, with live birth rates per thawed-oocyte-derived embryo transfer dropping from 43% for women aged <35 years at oocyte collection to 19% for those aged 41-42 years [1]. Multiple POC cycles may also be needed for a reasonable chance of a live birth from frozen oocytes [1]. Planned oocyte cryopreservation costs are substantial and pose a barrier for many women wanting to access the service [7, 10, 11]. In addition to the costs for retrieving and freezing oocytes, there are fees for ongoing storage and to utilise frozen oocytes in the future. Ovarian stimulation and oocyte collection expose women to small yet significant health risks. Complications are rare (0.4% of cycles) [12] but considered important amongst potential POC users [11, 1315]. Also, the risk of severe maternal morbidity from pregnancy (e.g. post-partum haemorrhage requiring blood transfusion, sepsis and cardiac failure) increases from age 30 years and is highest from 45 years onwards [16]. Finally, a 10-15 year follow up study reported that most (62%) POC patients had not accessed their frozen oocytes after storage [17]. Women who do not use their frozen oocytes may regret their decision to freeze and will eventually need to make a disposition decision. Those who do not wish or are unable to use their frozen oocytes [1821] may also face the dilemma of needing to make a disposition decision without having achieved their reproductive goals.
The limited evidence about POC decisions suggests that women may need more information and support to guide decision-making [2225]. For example, a US study of women who had frozen oocytes reported that 16% (n=33) had moderate to severe regret about pursuing the option, particularly when the information and emotional support they had received was perceived as inadequate for their decision [22]. A South Korean study of women who attended POC counselling also found that almost half their participants (n=40) had high decisional conflict after their visit [26]. Research performed to date on POC decisions have focussed on women who proceeded with the option [2224]. Data from a small sample of women who decided against POC (n=29) showed that few regretted their decision [27], however, more research is needed to understand the experiences of those who decide against it.
Availability of comprehensive and balanced POC information is limited. Most women are informed about POC from the media or online sources including fertility clinic websites [2830]. However, media information is often simplistic and incomplete [31], and online fertility clinic information reportedly lacks quality, transparency, and aims to persuade women towards POC [3235]. Some may also seek POC advice from primary care physicians such as general practitioners, who may feel inadequately informed to counsel their patients about the option [36] or, from fertility clinics which have commercial conflicts [37, 38].
Given the inadequacies in existing POC information and the apparent desire for decision support, this exploratory study aimed to identify the information and decision support needs of women interested in receiving POC information.

Methods

Design & setting

An online cross-sectional survey in a community setting.

Participants

Eligible participants were women aged 18-45 years, living in Australia, proficient in English, with access to the internet, and interested in receiving POC information. Those who completed their family or had frozen oocytes for medical reasons were excluded. We targeted a broad population of women interested in receiving POC information to gather perspectives from different stages of the decision-making process (e.g. pre-contemplation phase: not previously considered POC; contemplation phase: actively considering POC, and; the action and reflection phase: made their decision).

Data source

Survey questions were developed after a review of existing literature, and with the clinical and research expertise of the authors. Estimated completion time was 10-15 minutes. Fifty-two items were covered under the following sections:
a)
Participant Characteristics: Demographics, desire for (more) children in the future (yes/no/unsure), timing for (more) children in the future (as soon as I can/when I find a partner/other), and reason for interest in POC (multiple responses from a list).
 
b)
Information Sources: Methods used to obtain POC information (multiple responses from a list), time spent searching for POC information (multiple responses from a list), prior consultation with an in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) specialist (yes/no) and whether POC was discussed with friends (yes/no).
 
c)
Preferences for Information Delivery: Views about what age POC information should be provided to women (free-text), and by whom (multiple responses from a list). Participants were also asked to rank the usefulness of eight information delivery methods (brief pamphlet, paper copy Decision Aid, online Decision Aid, written booklet, information website, DVD, consultant communication aid and website with a fertility calculator) from 1=‘most useful’ to 8=‘least useful’. After reverse scoring, an average usefulness score per method was created with higher scores indicating greater usefulness (range: 1-8). To explore any other feedback participants may have, one free-text question asked if they had any comments about POC information, resources seen or received, and why certain kinds of information may or may not be helpful.
 
d)
Knowledge: A 14-item purposively designed knowledge scale with three response options (true/false/don’t know) measured participants’ understanding of broad concepts relating to age-related infertility and POC including its: benefits, success rates, procedure related health risks and side-effects, and alternatives. Correct responses were summed to create a total knowledge score (range: 0-14).
 
e)
Decisional Conflict: The validated 10-item low-literacy Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) measured decisional conflict, which is a state of uncertainty felt when choosing a health-related course of action (e.g. to freeze/not freeze oocytes) [39]. The scale can be used before, during, and after decision-making [40]. The four DCS sub-scales measure uncertainty, and three modifiable factors associated with uncertainty, namely feeling uninformed, unclear about personal values, and unsupported in decision-making [39]. Total scores were calculated (range: 0-100) and categorised as high (>37.5), moderate (25-37.5) and low (<25) as per the DCS user manual [39].
 
f)
Time to Decision: Length of time spent considering POC (free-text).
 

Procedure

The survey was open from June-December 2018. It was advertised in the University of Melbourne staff newsletter, and using paid Facebook advertising by the Royal Women’s Hospital, Melbourne, and the University of Melbourne’s Psychosocial Health and Wellbeing Research Unit. Facebook advertisements targeted females aged ≥18 years in Australia. Examples of the wording used in the newsletter and social media advertisements are: “[We] want to understand what information women need to make an informed decision about [POC]. Women aged 18-45 that are interested in [POC] information, are invited to take part in a one-off survey…” and “Join a study about the information and decision-making needs of women interested in [POC] information”, respectively. All advertisements included a link to the study’s information page. No advertisements were used to market POC to women. The information page detailed the study’s aim, inclusion criteria and participation requirements. Those who wished to continue were directed to the participant information and consent form to confirm their eligibility and provide informed consent. Participants were then asked to complete the online survey. There were no incentives provided for survey completion. All participant materials (i.e. the study advertisements, information page, consent form, and survey) used the terms ‘egg freezing’ or ‘elective egg freezing’ as they have better readability than POC.

Sample size

There was no primary outcome or hypothesis defined for this study. Therefore, the target sample size was not calculated using a power-based method, but instead a precision-based method was applied. A sample of 120 participants was ascertained to allow for a two-sided 95% confidence interval (CI) around a proportion with a margin of error (half-width) <10%, providing adequate precision of the survey results.

Data management and statistical analysis

Participant consent and survey data were collected and managed using REDCap electronic data capture tools hosted by the University of Melbourne [41, 42].
Categorical data were summarised as counts and proportions, and continuous data as means (standard deviation, SD) or medians (25th to 75th percentile, IQR) if skewed.
Decisional conflict and time to decision analyses were restricted to participants who had considered POC (e.g. made their decision or were considering POC at the time of the survey). Participants who had not previously considered POC were excluded from the analyses as they had not engaged in the decision and were considered inappropriate to include.
Univariable linear regression explored factors (age, relationship status, language spoken at home, education level, medical or health-related education, consulting an IVF specialist, decision outcome/uptake of POC, number of existing children, knowledge score and prior research into POC) associated with DCS score. Associations with p<0.20 were included in a multivariable linear regression model.
Time to decision data were coded into months by the project coordinator. Responses from three participants who were considering POC were without a time unit. These were assumed to be months. Ordered logistic regression estimated the association between time to decision (outcome: ≤6 months, 7-12 months, 13-24 months, 25-60 months, or >60 months) and DCS score (explanatory variable). The proportional odds assumption was checked before fitting the model.
Two-sided p-values and 95% CIs were reported without accounting for multiple testing. Missing data were deleted listwise when deriving summary statistics by excluding those with missing values from the denominator, and when fitting statistical models by excluding those with missing values for the dependent or independent variables. For example, the sample used in the multivariable linear regression model were participants who had considered POC and provided data for all included variables.
Free-text comments were analysed using thematic analysis. Comments were coded iteratively by the study coordinator into themes by identifying key words, concepts, and reflections in accordance with the Miles & Huberman framework [43]. Participants’ comments and their corresponding codes were subsequently reviewed and verified by the study lead.
All data were analysed using Stata (v15.1) [44], excluding the free-text comments which were analysed in Microsoft Excel.

Results

The number of eligible women who received the study invitation is unknown due to the recruitment methods used. Our participant information and consent form was clicked on 943 times. We cannot confirm if each click was by a unique and eligible person, therefore a precise response rate is unknown. Overall, 463 eligible women consented to participate. Of these, 352 (76%) started the survey and 290 (63%) completed all sections. Data from 332 (72%) women who completed at least the participant characteristics section of the survey were analysed (Fig. 1).

Participant characteristics

Most participants were aged ≤30 years (n=170, 62%), single (n=129, 39%), university qualified (n=265, 80%), and working in professional occupations (n=247, 75%). Half (n=166) were educated in a medical or health-related field (Table 1). At the time of the survey, the majority (n=249, 75%) had considered POC. Over two-thirds (n=224, 68%) wished to have (more) children in the future. Of these women, most wanted to have (more) children when they found a suitable partner (n=74, 33%) or as soon as possible (n=56, 25%). Common reasons for their interest in POC were single relationship status (n=154, 46%), desire to invest in their future reproductive potential (n=94, 28%), and because of a health condition (n=47, 14%) (Table 2).
Table 1
Participant characteristics
 
All (n = 332)
Considered POC (n=249)
Not previously considered POC (n=83)
Age*
 ≤ 25 years
93 (33.9%)
66 (31.4%)
27 (42.2%)
 26 to ≤ 30 years
77 (28.1%)
56 (26.7%)
21 (32.8%)
 31 to ≤ 35 years
58 (21.2%)
46 (21.9%)
12 (18.8%)
 36 to ≤ 40 years
34 (12.4%)
33 (15.7%)
1 (1.6%)
 > 40 years
12 (4.4%)
9 (4.3%)
3 (4.7%)
 Total number of responses
274
210
64
Relationship status
 Single
129 (39.0%)
106 (42.7%)
23 (27.7%)
 In a committed relationship and living together, engaged, married or de facto
124 (37.5%)
83 (33.5%)
41 (49.4%)
 In a committed relationship but not living together
57 (17.2%)
40 (16.1%)
17 (20.5%)
 In a relationship but not committed
15 (4.5%)
13 (5.2%)
2 (2.4%)
 Separated/divorced
6 (1.8%)
6 (2.4%)
0 (0.0%)
 Total number of responses
331
248
83
Relationship length for partnered participants*
 < 1 year
27 (14.0%)
22 (16.5%)
5 (8.3%)
 1 year to ≤ 5 years
98 (50.8%)
69 (51.9%)
29 (48.3%)
 > 5 years
68 (35.2%)
42 (31.6%)
26 (43.3%)
 Total number of responses
193
133
60
Location: Australian state or territory*
 New South Wales
65 (19.9%)
53 (21.6%)
12 (14.6%)
 Victoria
175 (53.5%)
127 (51.8%)
48 (58.5%)
 Other
87 (26.6%)
65 (26.5%)
22 (26.8%)
 Total number of responses
327
245
82
Location: Rural, remote or metropolitan area*
 Metropolitan
248 (75.8%)
190 (77.6%)
58 (70.7%)
 Metropolitan/rural border
12 (3.7%)
10 (4.1%)
2 (2.4%)
 Rural
67 (20.5%)
45 (18.4%)
22 (26.8%)
 Total number of responses
327
245
82
Years living in Australia*
 < 10 years
28 (9.8%)
17 (7.9%)
11 (15.5%)
 ≥ 10 years
259 (90.2%)
199 (92.1%)
60 (84.5%)
 Total number of responses
287
216
71
Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander descent
   
 Yes
8 (2.4%)
7 (2.8%)
1 (1.2%)
 No
323 (97.6%)
241 (97.2%)
82 (98.8%)
 Total number of responses
331
248
83
Language spoken at home
 English
318 (95.8%)
239 (96.0%)
79 (95.2%)
 Other
14 (4.2%)
10 (4.0%)
4 (4.8%)
 Total number of responses
332
249
83
Highest level of education completed
 High school
37 (11.1%)
21 (8.4%)
16 (19.3%)
 Trade (TAFE) certificate/diploma
30 (9.0%)
26 (10.4%)
4 (4.8%)
 Bachelor degree
133 (40.1%)
98 (39.4%)
35 (42.2%)
 Postgraduate diploma/degree
132 (39.8%)
104 (41.8%)
28 (33.7%)
 Total number of responses
332
249
83
Studied in a medical or other health-related field
 Yes
166 (50.0%)
119 (47.8%)
47 (56.6%)
 No
166 (50.0%)
130 (52.2%)
36 (43.4%)
 Total number of responses
332
249
83
Employment status
 Full-time employed
193 (58.1%)
155 (62.2%)
38 (45.8%)
 Part-time employed
74 (22.3%)
52 (20.9%)
22 (26.5%)
 Full-time student
46 (13.9%)
30 (12.0%)
16 (19.3%)
 Unemployed
8 (2.4%)
7 (2.8%)
1 (1.2%)
 Other (e.g. temporarily unable to work, part-time student, self-employed, homemaker)
11 (3.3%)
5 (2.0%)
6 (7.2%)
 Total number of responses
332
249
83
Occupation
 Professional
247 (74.6%)
194 (78.2%)
53 (63.9%)
 Full-time student §
46 (13.9%)
30 (12.1%)
16 (19.3%)
 Other (e.g. clerk/sales, home duties, hospitality, trade, labourer)
38 (11.5%)
24 (9.7%)
14 (16.9%)
 Total number of responses
331
248
83
Number of existing children
 No children
296 (89.4%)
223 (89.9%)
73 (88.0%)
 At least one biological child
30 (9.1%)
21 (8.5%)
9 (10.8%)
 At least one non-biological child
5 (1.5%)
4 (1.6%)
1 (1.2%)
 Total number of responses
331
248
83
Data are presented as n (%) unless otherwise stated. POC = Planned Oocyte Cryopreservation. *Categorised from free-text responses. Original response option was ‘married/de facto’. ‘Other’ free-text responses of ‘committed and living together’ and ‘engaged’ were included in this group as they were deemed similar. Category created by merging response options ‘Year 11 or 12’ and ‘Year 10 or below’. §Category created from ‘other’ free-text responses
Table 2
Participants’ interest, consideration and uptake of planned oocyte cryopreservation and parenting aspirations
 
All (n=332)
Considered POC (n=249)
Not previously considered POC (n=83)
Stage of considering POC
  Have previously frozen oocytes
11 (3.3%)
11 (4.4%)
0 (0.0%)
  Considered POC and made plans to go ahead with it
5 (1.5%)
5 (2.0%)
0 (0.0%)
  Currently considering POC but have not made any plans
196 (59.0%)
196 (78.7%)
0 (0.0%)
  Considered POC and decided not to go ahead with it
37 (11.1%)
37 (14.9%)
0 (0.0%)
  Have not previously considered POC
83 (25.0%)
0 (0.0%)
83 (100.0%)
  Total number of responses
332
249
83
Decision outcome/Uptake of POC
  Undecided
196 (59.0%)
196 (78.7%)
0 (0.0%)
  Decided to freeze oocytes
16 (4.8%)
16 (6.4%)
0 (0.0%)
  Decided not to freeze oocytes
37 (11.1%)
37 (14.9%)
0 (0.0%)
  Not previously considered POC
83 (25.0%)
0 (0.0%)
83 (100.0%)
  Total number of responses
332
249
83
Desire to have (more) children in the future
  Yes
224 (67.7%)
166 (66.9%)
58 (69.9%)
  No
14 (4.2%)
9 (3.6%)
5 (6.0%)
  Unsure
93 (28.1%)
73 (29.4%)
20 (24.1%)
  Total number of responses
331
248
83
Timing to have (more) children in the future (excludes participants who did not want (more) children or were unsure)
  When suitable partner is found
74 (33.0%)
62 (37.3%)
12 (20.7%)
  As soon as possible
56 (25.0%)
41 (24.7%)
15 (25.9%)
  When career is established or feeling financially stable*
38 (17.0%)
25 (15.1%)
13 (22.4%)
  When the time is right or feeling emotionally ready*
11 (4.9%)
7 (4.2%)
4 (6.9%)
  In ≤5 years*
21 (9.4%)
15 (9.0%)
6 (10.3%)
  Other
24 (10.7%)
16 (9.6%)
8 (13.8%)
  Total number of responses
224
166
58
Reason for interest in POC
  It is (was) an option in case I am single when I am ready to have children
154 (46.4%)
131 (52.6%)
23 (27.7%)
  It is (was) an investment for the future
94 (28.3%)
64 (25.7%)
30 (36.1%)
  I have a health condition that prevents (prevented) me from having children at the moment (at that time)
47 (14.2%)
39 (15.7%)
8 (9.6%)
  Other
25 (7.5%)
11 (4.4%)
14 (16.9%)
  Not interested/Have not considered egg freezing*
7 (2.1%)
0 (0.0%)
7 (8.4%)
  Unsure about having (more) children in the future*
5 (1.5%)
4 (1.6%)
1 (1.2%)
  Total number of responses
332
249
83
Data are presented as n (%) unless otherwise stated. POC = Planned Oocyte Cryopreservation. *Category created from ‘other’ free-text responses. Category created by merging response options ‘I hope (hoped) to have children in the future, but I am (was) single at the time’ and ‘it is (was) an option to try and preserve my fertility in case I don’t find a partner in time’ as they were deemed similar

Information sources

Over half the participants (n=162, 54%) had searched for POC information before completing the survey. For this subgroup, fertility clinic websites were the most common information source (n=114, 70%), followed by primary care physicians (n=49, 30%), and IVF specialists (n=44, 27%). Overall, 41 (14%) participants had consulted an IVF specialist about POC, including 13 (81%) of those who decided to freeze their oocytes, 8 (22%) of the those who decided against POC, and 20 (10%) of the those who were undecided. The length of time participants commonly spent searching for POC information was ≤6 months (n=55, 18%) followed by 1-2 years (n=47, 16%). Few (n=9, 3%) had spent ≥5 years searching for information. Almost half (n=141, 47%) had spoken with friends about POC (Table 3).
Table 3
Planned oocyte cryopreservation knowledge, information sources and preferences for information delivery
 
All (n=332)
Considered POC (n=249)
Not previously considered POC (n=83)
Level of Knowledge
   
Knowledge score (out of 14), mean (SD)
8.9 (2.3)
9.1 (2.2)
8.3 (2.4)
Total number of responses
324
246
78
Planned Oocyte Cryopreservation Information Sources
  
 Methods used to research POC*
   
  Did not research POC
139 (46.2%)
78 (33.6%)
61 (88.4%)
  Looked up fertility clinic websites
114 (37.9%)
110 (47.4%)
4 (5.8%)
  Spoke to a primary care physician
49 (16.3%)
47 (20.3%)
2 (2.9%)
  Spoke to a fertility specialist
44 (14.6%)
43 (18.5%)
1 (1.4%)
  Attended an information seminar held by a fertility clinic
13 (4.3%)
13 (5.6%)
0 (0.0%)
  General online research
10 (3.3%)
9 (3.9%)
1 (1.4%)
  Other
21 (7.0%)
20 (8.6%)
1 (1.4%)
  Total number of responses
301
232
69
 Consulted an IVF specialist
41 (13.6%)
41 (17.6%)
0 (0.0%)
  Total number of responses
302
233
69
 Spoke to friends about POC
141 (47.2%)
130 (56.5%)
11 (15.9%)
  Total number of responses
299
230
69
 Time spent searching for POC information
   
  Did not look for any information
130 (43.2%)
67 (28.9%)
63 (91.3%)
  Within the last 6 months
55 (18.3%)
51 (22.0%)
4 (5.8%)
  6 months to 1 year ago
32 (10.6%)
30 (12.9%)
2 (2.9%)
  1 to 2 years ago
47 (15.6%)
47 (20.3%)
0 (0.0%)
  2 to 5 years ago
28 (9.3%)
28 (12.1%)
0 (0.0%)
  > 5 years ago
9 (3.0%)
9 (3.9%)
0 (0.0%)
  Total number of responses
301
232
69
Preferences for Planned Oocyte Cryopreservation Information Delivery
   
 Age women should be informed about POC by§
   
  ≤18 years
42 (14.4%)
31 (13.7%)
11 (16.9%)
  19 years to ≤30 years
214 (73.3%)
172 (75.8%)
42 (64.6%)
  31 years to ≤35 years
32 (11.0%)
23 (10.1%)
9 (13.8%)
  36 years to ≤40 years
4 (1.4%)
1 (0.4%)
3 (4.6%)
  Total number of responses
292
227
65
 Preferred providers of POC information*
   
  Fertility specialists
255 (85.0%)
200 (86.2%)
55 (80.9%)
  Primary care physicians
244 (81.3%)
187 (80.6%)
57 (83.8%)
  Fertility counsellors
222 (74.0%)
174 (75.0%)
48 (70.6%)
  Fertility nurses
207 (69.0%)
158 (68.1%)
49 (72.1%)
  Presenters at a POC seminar held by a fertility clinic
144 (48.0%)
110 (47.4%)
34 (50.0%)
  An independent source (e.g. not someone from a fertility clinic)
120 (40.0%)
96 (41.4%)
24 (35.3%)
  Administrative staff from a fertility clinic
47 (15.7%)
39 (16.8%)
8 (11.8%)
  Other
12 (4.0%)
9 (3.9%)
3 (4.4%)
  Total number of responses
300
232
68
 Information delivery method usefulness score, median (IQR)
   
  Website with accurate information
8.0 (7.0-8.0)
8.0 (7.0-8.0)
7.0 (7.0-8.0)
  Total number of responses
289
222
67
  Website which allows users to calculate their approximate chances of conceiving naturally given their circumstances
7.0 (6.0-8.0)
7.0 (6.0-8.0)
7.0 (6.0-8.0)
  Total number of responses
288
222
66
  Online interactive decision-aid
7.0 (5.0-8.0)
7.0 (5.0-8.0)
6.0 (5.0-8.0)
  Total number of responses
290
223
67
  Written booklet (not a decision-aid)
6.0 (4.5-7.0)
6.0 (5.0-7.0)
6.0 (4.0-7.0)
  Total number of responses
288
222
66
  Paper copy decision-aid
5.0 (4.0-7.0)
5.0 (4.0-7.0)
5.0 (4.0-7.0)
  Total number of responses
288
221
67
  Brief pamphlet
5.0 (4.0-6.0)
5.0 (4.0-6.0)
5.0 (3.0-6.0)
  Total number of responses
289
222
67
  Consultation communication aid (e.g. flip-chart)
5.0 (4.0-6.0)
5.0 (3.0-6.0)
5.0 (4.0-6.0)
  Total number of responses
287
221
66
  Take home DVD
3.0 (2.0-5.0)
3.0 (2.0-5.0)
4.0 (2.0-6.0)
  Total number of responses
288
222
66
Data are presented as n (%) unless otherwise stated. POC = Planned Oocyte Cryopreservation, IVF = In-vitro fertilisation, SD = Standard deviation, IQR = 25th to 75th percentile. *Multiple options could be selected. Original response option was general practitioner. Category created from ‘other’ free-text responses. §Categorised from free-text responses

Preferences for information delivery

Most participants (n=214, 73%) believed women should be informed about POC between ages 19-30 years. Preferred providers of POC information were fertility specialists (n=255, 85%), followed by primary care physicians (n=244, 81%), fertility counsellors (n=222, 74%), and fertility nurses (n=207, 69%). The three information delivery methods deemed most useful to support POC decisions were in online formats (Table 3).
Forty-one participants provided free-text comments. Three key themes were identified: 'a need for more detailed POC information', ‘a need to improve accessibility to POC information', and 'concerns about the commercial nature of POC’ (Table 4).
Table 4
Quotations illustrating the key themes derived from participant free-text comments
Theme
Illustrative Quotes
A need for more detailed POC information
“Most sources of information are not comprehensive-they try to give a simple overview, and don’t answer the questions that matter most, or don’t answer in enough detail. They tell you about potential side effects but not the rates. They say it can be costly but don’t give you a ballpark range”
Concerns about the commercial nature of POC
“Fertility clinics are too financially invested in persuading women to use their services…They tend to downplay the risks of the procedure and overstate the potential benefits”
A need for improved accessibility to POC information
There is very limited information available, unless you seek it out specifically from a fertility clinic…most [primary care physicians] don’t know much about the process, and it’s not something which is spoken about openly…the quality of the information online is very poor and often comes across as just someone’s personal opinion

Level of knowledge

Mean knowledge score was 8.9/14 (SD: 2.3) (Table 3), indicating a moderate understanding of POC and age-related infertility. Five of the 14 knowledge questions were answered with incorrect or unsure responses by >40% of participants. These questions related to POC procedure associated health-risks, success rates, limitations to assessing oocyte quality before collection, and whether oocyte quality reduces with time in storage (Fig. 2).

Decisional conflict

For participants who had considered POC (n=249), mean DCS score was 57.1/100 (SD: 27.2), and most (78%) had high decisional conflict (score >37.5) (Table 5).
Table 5
Decisional conflict and time to decision amongst those who had considered planned oocyte cryopreservation
 
Number (%)
Decisional Conflict Scale
Total score (out of 100), mean (SD) (n=235)
57.1 (27.2)
Categories (n=235)
 
 Low decisional conflict (score <25)
31 (13.2%)
 Moderate decisional conflict (score 25-37.5)
21 (8.9%)
 High decisional conflict (score >37.5)
183 (77.9%)
Sub-scale scores (out of 100), median (IQR)
 
 Uncertainty (n=237)
100.0 (50.0-100.0)
 Uninformed (n=238)
66.7 (33.3-100.0)
 Unclear about personal values (n=236)
50.0 (25.0-100.0)
 Unsupported in decision making (n=238)
33.3 (16.7-66.7)
Time to Decision
 Months spent considering POC, median (IQR) (n=210)
12.0 (6.0-24.0)
 Months spent considering POC by undecided participants, median (IQR) (n=168)
12.0 (6.0-24.0)
 Months spent considering POC by decided participants, median (IQR) (n=42)
24.0 (12.0-36.0)
Data are presented as n (%) unless otherwise stated. POC = Planned Oocyte Cryopreservation, DCS = Decisional Conflict Scale, SD = Standard deviation, IQR = 25th to 75th percentile
Participants included in the multivariable linear regression model had similar characteristics to the entire cohort that had considered POC (Supplementary Table 1). Factors omitted from the model were: language spoken at home (p=0.33); education level (p=0.80); medical or health-related education (p=0.41), and; number of existing children (p=0.35). Participants who had searched for POC information had a lower mean DCS score than those who had not (-19.3 [95% CI]: (-26.3, -12.2), p<0.001), however, this variable was also not included in the model due to high collinearity with consulting an IVF specialist. In the multivariable linear regression model, mean DCS score was lower for participants who had consulted an IVF specialist vs had not (-17.5, 95% CI [-28.0, -7.1], p=0.001), and with every 1-point increase in knowledge score (-2.4, 95% CI [-3.9, -0.8], p=0.003). Participants who decided, either to freeze oocytes (-33.9, 95% CI [-49.1, -18.8], p<0.001) or not to freeze oocytes (-10.3, 95% CI [-20.4, -0.2], p=0.045), had lower mean DCS scores than those who were undecided. When comparing POC uptake, mean DCS score was lower for participants who chose to freeze their oocytes vs those who decided against it (-23.6, 95% CI [-40.2, -7.0], p=0.005) (Table 6).
Table 6
Linear regression analysis of decisional conflict scale scores amongst those who had considered planned oocyte cryopreservation
  
Univariable Analysis
Multivariable Analysis§
Characteristic
N, Mean DCS (SD)
Estimate
(95% CI) Univariable
P value
Estimate
(95% CI) Multivariable
P value
Age*
     
 ≤ 25 years
61, 58.0 (24.4)
Reference
 
Reference
 
 26 to ≤ 30 years
52, 61.2 (25.7)
3.2 (-6.8, 13.2)
0.53
8.9 (0.1, 17.6)
0.047
 31 to ≤ 35 years
45, 59.8 (25.2)
1.7 (-8.7, 12.2)
0.74
7.2 (-2.0, 16.4)
0.13
 36 to ≤ 40 years
31, 46.5 (35.2)
-11.6 (-23.3, 0.1)
0.05
5.4 (-5.7, 16.6)
0.34
 > 40 years
8, 36.9 (24.0)
-21.2 (-41.1, -1.2)
0.038
-8.7 (-26.6, 9.2)
0.34
Relationship status
     
 Single
99, 57.8 (27.2)
Reference
 
Reference
 
 In a committed relationship and living together, engaged, married or de facto
80, 57.2 (27.8)
-0.6 (-8.5, 7.3)
0.89
0.4 (-7.0, 7.8)
0.91
 In a committed relationship but not living together
38, 53.7 (25.0)
-4.1 (-14.2, 5.9)
0.42
-4.3 (-14.2, 5.5)
0.38
 In a relationship but not committed
11, 73.6 (20.1)
15.8 (-0.9, 32.6)
0.06
10.9 (-5.9, 27.8)
0.20
 Separated/divorced
6, 28.3 (26.4)
-29.5 (-51.6, -7.3)
0.009
-12.3 (-45.9, 21.3)
0.47
Consulted an IVF specialist
     
 No
190, 62.9 (23.5)
Reference
 
Reference
 
 Yes
40, 30.6 (28.5)
-32.3 (-40.7, -23.9)
<0.001
-17.5 (-28.0, -7.1)
0.001
Decision outcome/uptake of POC †
     
 Undecided
185, 62.7 (23.2)
Reference
 
Reference
 
 Decided to freeze
15, 13.7 (23.9)
-49.0 (-61.8, -36.3)
<0.001
-33.9 (-49.1, -18.8)
<0.001
 Decided not to freeze
35, 46.0 (28.8)
-16.7 (-25.5, -7.9)
<0.001
-10.3 (-20.4, -0.2)
0.045
Knowledge score
     
 1-point increase
235, 57.1 (27.2)
-3.4 (-4.9, -1.9)
<0.001
-2.4 (-3.9, -0.8)
0.003
DCS = Decisional Conflict Scale, SD = Standard Deviation, CI = Confidence Interval, IVF = In-Vitro Fertilisation, POC = Planned Oocyte Cryopreservation
*Age was categorised into five-year groupings due to nonlinearity with DCS
Mean DCS score for decided participants (i.e. those who decided to freeze or not to freeze their oocytes) is 36.3 (n=50, SD: 31.0). The adjusted estimate and 95% CI for decided participants vs undecided participants is -18.4 (-27.5, -9.3), p<0.001. The adjusted estimate and 95% CI for participants who decided to freeze their oocytes vs participants who decided not to freeze oocytes is -23.6 (-40.2, -7.0), p=0.005
Covariates presented are those with p<0.20 in the univariable linear regression model
§Covariates with p<0.05 in the multivariable model are: consulted an IVF specialist (p=0.001), decision outcome/uptake of POC (p<0.001), and knowledge score (p=0.003). Sample used in the multivariable linear regression model (n=191) were participants who had considered POC and provided data for all included variables

Time to decision

Median time to decision for decided participants (n=53, 16%) was 24-months (IQR: 12-36, Table 5). Of the participants who had considered POC, 53 (25%) spent ≤6 months; 55 (26%) spent 7-12 months, 60 (29%) spent 13-24 months, 36 (17%) spent 25-60 months, and 6 (3%) spent >60 months contemplating its use. In an ordered logistic regression model, a 5% relative increase in the odds of experiencing prolonged indecision was associated with every 5-point lower DCS score (odds ratio: 1.05, 95% CI [1.01, 1.10], p=0.02). This suggests that participants with lower DCS scores were more likely to have considered POC for longer than participants with higher DCS scores.

Discussion

This novel study aimed to identify the information and decision support needs of reproductive aged women who were interested in receiving POC information. Overall, participants had gaps in their understanding of POC highlighting a need to improve awareness. The majority had considered POC but only about half had searched for information about it. For these participants, the predominant information source was fertility clinic websites. Few sought clinical advice. Many of the women who had considered POC had high decisional conflict, indicating a need for decision support. Those who reached a POC decision generally spent around two-years deciding. There was also strong support for providing women POC information by age 30 years. Preferred information providers were healthcare professionals or online resources.
Similar to previous reports of POC users, most participants were single, childless, university educated, and working in professional occupations [11, 22, 45, 46]. Unexpectedly, half had medical or other health-related training. Comparable data from similar studies are limited as this type of education is often not reported. One study of 150 POC users from the US and Israel showed 16% had a medical degree [47], however our cohorts are not directly comparable. It is possible that women working in these professions have a greater interest in POC as the challenges of career progression, particularly in the medical field, can often influence the timing of parenthood [4850], and hence consideration of use. Whilst career advancement is not considered a strong motivator for POC use [11], these women may still consider the option even if it does not translate to uptake.
Time to decision was typically around two-years for those who had decided about POC. This is consistent with data showing that most childless reproductive aged women remained undecided about POC after a two-year period [30]. The average age at POC in published data to date is mid-late 30s [1, 2, 11, 15]. A two-year contemplation period for women in their mid-30s or above is likely to reduce the benefit of POC and ultimately live birth outcomes [1]. Previous authors suggested that women become more engaged in POC decisions as they approach the end of their reproductive years [30]. However, most of our participants believed that women should be informed about the option by age 30 years suggesting a desire to engage in earlier decision-making. Some women regret not freezing their oocytes earlier [27, 51]. Therefore, informing women about POC at a younger age may support better pregnancy planning, and potentially timelier uptake. Nonetheless, barriers to access POC, such as costs and storage time limits [10, 11, 52], may still prevent women from using the technology at more ideal age (e.g. in their 20s or early 30s) [1, 2]. In addition, earlier consideration of POC may encourage more women to freeze oocytes which ultimately are never used [17]. Thus, it may also expose more women to unnecessary health risks, costs, and future decisions about the disposition of their oocytes. Women should be provided with comprehensive information at the time of considering POC to facilitate informed choice. This includes information about frozen oocyte usage rates and the disposition of unused oocytes.
Most participants believed healthcare professionals should provide POC information, demonstrating a need for clinical, evidence-based advice. Fertility specialists were the preferred source. However, if women want to engage in early education about POC, primary care physicians (e.g. general practitioners) may be best placed to initially discuss the option. Research into primary care physicians providing POC information is limited. However, these clinicians may find it challenging to discuss the topic and fertility more broadly, due to limited knowledge, appointment time constraints, and concerns about causing distress and appearing paternalistic or presumptuous towards their patients [36, 53, 54]. A small Australian study (n=72) reported that most primary care physicians wanted more information and training about POC, indicating a willingness to assist patients with these decisions [36]. This type of educational support could be provided by professional societies [36]. Although some patients may find it inappropriate for primary care physicians to provide unprompted fertility-related information [54], many others approve of them raising the topic [55]. To navigate these conversations, primary care physicians could ask their patients if they are interested in discussing their reproductive intentions. Suitable times for these conversations may be during general or reproductive health appointments [11, 56]. Also, despite most of our participants believing POC information should be provided by primary care physicians, few had consulted them consistent with previous data [56].
Over half our participants had searched for POC information mainly from fertility clinic websites. In addition, online information delivery was rated as the most useful method to support POC decisions. Together, this highlights the value of providing POC information online. Web-based materials are private, highly accessible, and do not require attending clinic appointments which usually incur costs and have restricted hours of access.
Also, our data suggests that some women make their decision (particularly against POC) without obtaining clinical advice. This is different to other health-related treatment decisions where clinicians are involved in the decision from the outset [57]. Specialist counselling is necessary for those who wish to proceed with POC or want personalised information to consider [58, 59]. But, for a subset of women who ultimately decide against POC, general information alone may be sufficient to inform their decision. In addition to receiving POC information from primary care physicians, an online resource providing evidence-based, unbiased information about POC and its alternatives, may support decision-making including whether to consult an IVF specialist.
Most participants who considered using POC had high decisional conflict, demonstrating the difficulty of this decision. Higher DCS scores are associated with poorer knowledge of options, greater decision regret, and decision delay [39, 60]. In our study, consulting an IVF specialist about POC was highly associated with lower decisional conflict. However, given many women have high decisional conflict even after receiving specialist counselling [26], there appears to be a need for additional support to supplement clinical advice. A Decision Aid for POC may reduce decisional conflict as demonstrated in other health areas [61]. These tools are used to support shared decision-making [62, 63] and are recommended by the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology for fertility preservation decisions [52]. There are Decision Aids for other elective procedures [61] including the use of fertility preservation for medical reasons [64, 65]. The International Patient Decision Aid Standards Collaboration [66] provide a framework which can be implemented to develop a Decision Aid for POC. Finally, we found no association between high decisional conflict and advanced age (>37 years) as demonstrated in prior research [26]. This may reflect population differences between the two studies.
Participants who decided against POC had higher decisional conflict than those who decided to freeze their oocytes. This may reflect a difference in the information resources used by the two groups. For instance, most women who chose to freeze their oocytes received specialist counselling, whilst only a few who decided against POC sought similar advice, and consequently may be less informed. It is possible that barriers to access POC, such as affordability [10, 11], could mean that some women decide POC is unfeasible early in the consideration process without conducting full investigations into the option.
Overall, participants were moderately informed about POC and age-related infertility. Low knowledge of these concepts was reported in the general population using a similar knowledge scale [14]. The difference in comprehension likely reflects our cohort’s interest in the topic and prior research performed by some participants. Main knowledge gaps related to POC procedure associated health risks, success rates, limitations to assessing oocyte quality, and whether time in storage reduced oocyte quality. In addition, we observed an association between higher knowledge score and lower decisional conflict. Together, this suggests that addressing these gaps in knowledge, through specialist counselling or other educational initiatives, may reduce POC decisional conflict. The provision of accurate, transparent, and accessible information about POC success rates is particularly important as IVF success rates are often overestimated [6769]. It is possible that some women may choose to defer their decision about POC because they misjudge its potential benefit at an older age, which could create unrealistic expectations about the technology when they return to their decision in the future.
This is the first study to our knowledge measuring decisional conflict and time to decision in a broad, community-based group of women who have considered using POC. It addresses a gap in evidence about the information and decision support needs of those who want to receive POC information. The generalisability of these findings may be limited, although the extent of these limitations is difficult to determine as data from a directly comparable group are not available. It is possible that women were more likely to participate in this study if they were actively considering POC or searching for information. Participants may also reflect women with higher decisional conflict than in the population. However, given the only other study reporting on POC decisional conflict also found that many women who received specialist counselling had high DCS scores [26], this may not be the case. Whilst we aimed to recruit women from the community who were interested in receiving POC information, we observed an unexpectedly high proportion of participants with medical or health-related education. It is possible these women are more likely to consider POC, but it may also reflect the recruitment methods used. In addition, we observed participant attrition (Fig. 1). Participants with a greater interest in POC may have been more likely to complete the survey. We were ethically obliged to use data from incomplete surveys as participants had spent time providing us their information and did not withdraw from the study. This has contributed to some missing data observed in our analysis, however, question completion rates were high (>82%) (Supplementary Table 2). Other limitations inherent to any cross-sectional survey are the use of self-reported data, and the relevancy of results over time particularly in the rapidly evolving field of POC. Our knowledge scale was designed in the absence of a relevant validated scale; hence it may not measure actual knowledge as intended. The scale aims to assess understanding of general concepts and does not consider nuances that may arise with individuals or changes to success rates over time.

Conclusion

Women interested in receiving POC information had gaps in their knowledge of the topic including its potential health risks and success rates. They also believed women should receive POC information by age 30 years, preferably by healthcare professionals or online resources. Most who had considered using POC had high decisional conflict demonstrating a need for decision support. Time to decision was typically around two-years which may impact the chances of a successful pregnancy from frozen oocytes in the future. There is a need for comprehensive and transparent information, and decision support to help women make informed and timely POC decisions. Primary care physicians and online resources may help to address women’s gaps in knowledge, reduce their decisional conflict, and encourage earlier consideration of POC.

Acknowledgements

Throughout the paper we refer to access and use of planned oocyte cryopreservation by women. However, we acknowledge that oocyte cryopreservation may also be relevant to individuals who do not identify as women. We thank our participants, the Royal Women’s Hospital, Melbourne and the Eggsurance collaborative group (F Agresta, D Lieberman, R Anderson, R Norman, R Hart, L Johnson, J Michelmore, A Parle, F Summers and C Allingham) for their contribution to this study. M Peate is supported by a National Breast Cancer Foundation Early Career Fellowship (ECF-15-005), M Hickey is supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council Leadership Level 2 Investigator Grant, and J Fisher is supported by the Finkel Professorial Fellowship, funded by the Finkel Family Foundation.

Declarations

This research was approved by the University of Melbourne Human Research Ethics Committee (1851348). All methods were performed in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations. Informed consent was provided by all participants prior to taking part in the study. WL is the Director of Reproductive Medicine, Fertility and Research Centre, Royal Hospital for Women, Sydney, Australia, and a fertility specialist at City Fertility, Sydney, Australia. RL is the Director of Women’s Health Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia; committee secretary for the Australian and New Zealand Society of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility; and member of the Victorian Assisted Reproductive Treatment Authority clinical advisory committee. MP, MH, KH, SB, JF and SS have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

Ethics approval

This research was approved by the University of Melbourne Human Research Ethics Committee (1851348). All methods were performed in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations.
Informed consent was provided by all participants prior to taking part in the study.

Competing interests

WL is the Director of Reproductive Medicine, Fertility and Research Centre, Royal Hospital for Women, Sydney, Australia, and a fertility specialist at City Fertility, Sydney, Australia. RL is the Director of Women’s Health Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia; committee secretary for the Australian and New Zealand Society of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility; and member of the Victorian Assisted Reproductive Treatment Authority clinical advisory committee. MP, MH, KH, SB, JF and SS have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.
Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://​creativecommons.​org/​licenses/​by/​4.​0/​.

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Unsere Produktempfehlungen

e.Med Interdisziplinär

Kombi-Abonnement

Für Ihren Erfolg in Klinik und Praxis - Die beste Hilfe in Ihrem Arbeitsalltag

Mit e.Med Interdisziplinär erhalten Sie Zugang zu allen CME-Fortbildungen und Fachzeitschriften auf SpringerMedizin.de.

e.Med Gynäkologie

Kombi-Abonnement

Mit e.Med Gynäkologie erhalten Sie Zugang zu CME-Fortbildungen der beiden Fachgebiete, den Premium-Inhalten der Fachzeitschriften, inklusive einer gedruckten gynäkologischen oder urologischen Zeitschrift Ihrer Wahl.

Anhänge

Supplementary information

Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Kawwass JF, Crawford S, Hipp HS. Frozen eggs: national autologous oocyte thaw outcomes. Fertil Steril. 2021;116:1077–84.PubMedCrossRef Kawwass JF, Crawford S, Hipp HS. Frozen eggs: national autologous oocyte thaw outcomes. Fertil Steril. 2021;116:1077–84.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Johnston M, Richings NM, Leung A, Sakkas D, Catt S. A major increase in oocyte cryopreservation cycles in the USA, Australia and New Zealand since 2010 is highlighted by younger women but a need for standardized data collection. Hum Reprod. 2021;36:624–35.PubMedCrossRef Johnston M, Richings NM, Leung A, Sakkas D, Catt S. A major increase in oocyte cryopreservation cycles in the USA, Australia and New Zealand since 2010 is highlighted by younger women but a need for standardized data collection. Hum Reprod. 2021;36:624–35.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Huttler A, Koelper N, Mainigi M, Gracia C, Senapati S. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the perception of planned oocyte cryopreservation in the United States. FS Rep. 2022;3:145–52. Huttler A, Koelper N, Mainigi M, Gracia C, Senapati S. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the perception of planned oocyte cryopreservation in the United States. FS Rep. 2022;3:145–52.
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Raghunandan A, Vyas N, Aluko A, Spandorfer SD, Rosenwaks Z. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on social oocyte cryopreservation trends. Fertil Steril. 2022;118:e30.PubMedCentralCrossRef Raghunandan A, Vyas N, Aluko A, Spandorfer SD, Rosenwaks Z. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on social oocyte cryopreservation trends. Fertil Steril. 2022;118:e30.PubMedCentralCrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Weidenbaum EM, Cascante SD, DeVore S, Hodes-Wertz B, Grifo JA, Blakemore JK. Lockdown uptick: Did the SARS-COV-2 pandemic generate an increase in planned oocyte cryopreservation (POC)? Fertil Steril. 2021;116:e218–9.CrossRef Weidenbaum EM, Cascante SD, DeVore S, Hodes-Wertz B, Grifo JA, Blakemore JK. Lockdown uptick: Did the SARS-COV-2 pandemic generate an increase in planned oocyte cryopreservation (POC)? Fertil Steril. 2021;116:e218–9.CrossRef
6.
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Practice Committees of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine and the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. Mature oocyte cryopreservation: a guideline. Fertil Steril. 2013;99:37–43.CrossRef Practice Committees of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine and the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. Mature oocyte cryopreservation: a guideline. Fertil Steril. 2013;99:37–43.CrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Planned oocyte cryopreservation for women seeking to preserve future reproductive potential: an Ethics Committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2018;110:1022–8.CrossRef Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Planned oocyte cryopreservation for women seeking to preserve future reproductive potential: an Ethics Committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2018;110:1022–8.CrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Johnston M, Fuscaldo G, Richings NM, Gwini S, Catt S. Cracked open: exploring attitudes on access to egg freezing. Sex Reprod Health Matters. 2020;28:1758441.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Johnston M, Fuscaldo G, Richings NM, Gwini S, Catt S. Cracked open: exploring attitudes on access to egg freezing. Sex Reprod Health Matters. 2020;28:1758441.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Platts S, et al. Exploring women’s attitudes, knowledge, and intentions to use oocyte freezing for non-medical reasons: A systematic review. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2021;100:383–93.PubMedCrossRef Platts S, et al. Exploring women’s attitudes, knowledge, and intentions to use oocyte freezing for non-medical reasons: A systematic review. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2021;100:383–93.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Levi-Setti PE, et al. Appraisal of clinical complications after 23,827 oocyte retrievals in a large assisted reproductive technology program. Fertil Steril. 2018;109:1038–1043.e1.PubMedCrossRef Levi-Setti PE, et al. Appraisal of clinical complications after 23,827 oocyte retrievals in a large assisted reproductive technology program. Fertil Steril. 2018;109:1038–1043.e1.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Lallemant C, Vassard D, Nyboe Andersen A, Schmidt L, Macklon N. Medical and social egg freezing: internet-based survey of knowledge and attitudes among women in Denmark and the UK. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2016;95:1402–10.PubMedCrossRef Lallemant C, Vassard D, Nyboe Andersen A, Schmidt L, Macklon N. Medical and social egg freezing: internet-based survey of knowledge and attitudes among women in Denmark and the UK. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2016;95:1402–10.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Daniluk JC, Koert E. Childless women's beliefs and knowledge about oocyte freezing for social and medical reasons. Hum Reprod. 2016;31:2313–20.PubMedCrossRef Daniluk JC, Koert E. Childless women's beliefs and knowledge about oocyte freezing for social and medical reasons. Hum Reprod. 2016;31:2313–20.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Fuchs Weizman N, Baram S, Montbriand J, Librach C. Planned oocyte cryopreservation (Planned OC): systematic review and meta-analysis of cost-efficiency and patients’ perspective. BJOG. 2021;128:950–62.PubMedCrossRef Fuchs Weizman N, Baram S, Montbriand J, Librach C. Planned oocyte cryopreservation (Planned OC): systematic review and meta-analysis of cost-efficiency and patients’ perspective. BJOG. 2021;128:950–62.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Blakemore JK, Grifo JA, DeVore SM, Hodes-Wertz B, Berkeley AS. Planned oocyte cryopreservation—10–15-year follow-up: return rates and cycle outcomes. Fertil Steril. 2021;115:1511–20.PubMedCrossRef Blakemore JK, Grifo JA, DeVore SM, Hodes-Wertz B, Berkeley AS. Planned oocyte cryopreservation—10–15-year follow-up: return rates and cycle outcomes. Fertil Steril. 2021;115:1511–20.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Yee S, Goodman CV, Fu V, Lipton NJ, Librach CL. Parenthood desire, childbearing plans and oocyte utilization among women who previously underwent planned oocyte cryopreservation. Reprod Biomed Online. 2021;42:442–50.PubMedCrossRef Yee S, Goodman CV, Fu V, Lipton NJ, Librach CL. Parenthood desire, childbearing plans and oocyte utilization among women who previously underwent planned oocyte cryopreservation. Reprod Biomed Online. 2021;42:442–50.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Tsafrir A, et al. ‘Why have women not returned to use their frozen oocytes?’: a 5-year follow-up of women after planned oocyte cryopreservation. Reprod Biomed Online. 2021;43:1137–45.PubMedCrossRef Tsafrir A, et al. ‘Why have women not returned to use their frozen oocytes?’: a 5-year follow-up of women after planned oocyte cryopreservation. Reprod Biomed Online. 2021;43:1137–45.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Wafi A, Nekkebroeck J, Blockeel C, De Munck N, Tournaye H, De Vos M. A follow-up survey on the reproductive intentions and experiences of women undergoing planned oocyte cryopreservation. Reprod Biomed Online. 2020;40:207–14.PubMedCrossRef Wafi A, Nekkebroeck J, Blockeel C, De Munck N, Tournaye H, De Vos M. A follow-up survey on the reproductive intentions and experiences of women undergoing planned oocyte cryopreservation. Reprod Biomed Online. 2020;40:207–14.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Hammarberg K, et al. Reproductive experiences of women who cryopreserved oocytes for non-medical reasons. Hum Reprod. 2017;32:575–81.PubMed Hammarberg K, et al. Reproductive experiences of women who cryopreserved oocytes for non-medical reasons. Hum Reprod. 2017;32:575–81.PubMed
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Greenwood EA, Pasch LA, Hastie J, Cedars MI, Huddleston HG. To freeze or not to freeze: decision regret and satisfaction following elective oocyte cryopreservation. Fertil Steril. 2018;109:1097–104.PubMedCrossRef Greenwood EA, Pasch LA, Hastie J, Cedars MI, Huddleston HG. To freeze or not to freeze: decision regret and satisfaction following elective oocyte cryopreservation. Fertil Steril. 2018;109:1097–104.PubMedCrossRef
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Jones BP, et al. Perceptions, outcomes, and regret following social egg freezing in the UK; a cross-sectional survey. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2020;99:324–32.PubMedCrossRef Jones BP, et al. Perceptions, outcomes, and regret following social egg freezing in the UK; a cross-sectional survey. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2020;99:324–32.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Gurbuz A, et al. Decision regret and associated factors following oocyte cryopreservation in patients with diminished ovarian reserve and/or age-related fertility decline. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2021;38:1469–79.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Gurbuz A, et al. Decision regret and associated factors following oocyte cryopreservation in patients with diminished ovarian reserve and/or age-related fertility decline. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2021;38:1469–79.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
26.
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Stoop D, Maes E, Polyzos NP, Verheyen G, Tournaye H, Nekkebroeck J. Does oocyte banking for anticipated gamete exhaustion influence future relational and reproductive choices? A follow-up of bankers and non-bankers. Hum Reprod. 2015;30:338–44.PubMedCrossRef Stoop D, Maes E, Polyzos NP, Verheyen G, Tournaye H, Nekkebroeck J. Does oocyte banking for anticipated gamete exhaustion influence future relational and reproductive choices? A follow-up of bankers and non-bankers. Hum Reprod. 2015;30:338–44.PubMedCrossRef
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Stevenson EL, Gispanski L, Fields K, Cappadora M, Hurt M. Knowledge and decision making about future fertility and oocyte cryopreservation among young women. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2019;24:1–10. Stevenson EL, Gispanski L, Fields K, Cappadora M, Hurt M. Knowledge and decision making about future fertility and oocyte cryopreservation among young women. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2019;24:1–10.
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Tozzo P, Fassina A, Nespeca P, Spigarolo G, Caenazzo L. Understanding social oocyte freezing in Italy: a scoping survey on university female students' awareness and attitudes. Life Sci Soc Policy. 2019;15:3.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Tozzo P, Fassina A, Nespeca P, Spigarolo G, Caenazzo L. Understanding social oocyte freezing in Italy: a scoping survey on university female students' awareness and attitudes. Life Sci Soc Policy. 2019;15:3.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
30.
Zurück zum Zitat Sousa-Leite M, Figueiredo B, Ter Keurst A, Boivin J, Gameiro S. Women's attitudes and beliefs about using fertility preservation to prevent age-related fertility decline-A two-year follow-up. Patient Educ Couns. 2019;102:1695–702.PubMedCrossRef Sousa-Leite M, Figueiredo B, Ter Keurst A, Boivin J, Gameiro S. Women's attitudes and beliefs about using fertility preservation to prevent age-related fertility decline-A two-year follow-up. Patient Educ Couns. 2019;102:1695–702.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Zurück zum Zitat Campo-Engelstein L, Aziz R, Darivemula S, Raffaele J, Bhatia R, Parker WM. Freezing fertility or freezing false hope? A content analysis of social egg freezing in U.S. print media. AJOB Empir Bioeth. 2018;9:181–93.PubMedCrossRef Campo-Engelstein L, Aziz R, Darivemula S, Raffaele J, Bhatia R, Parker WM. Freezing fertility or freezing false hope? A content analysis of social egg freezing in U.S. print media. AJOB Empir Bioeth. 2018;9:181–93.PubMedCrossRef
32.
Zurück zum Zitat Avraham S, Machtinger R, Cahan T, Sokolov A, Racowsky C, Seidman DS. What is the quality of information on social oocyte cryopreservation provided by websites of Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology member fertility clinics? Fertil Steril. 2014;101:222–6.PubMedCrossRef Avraham S, Machtinger R, Cahan T, Sokolov A, Racowsky C, Seidman DS. What is the quality of information on social oocyte cryopreservation provided by websites of Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology member fertility clinics? Fertil Steril. 2014;101:222–6.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Zurück zum Zitat Barbey C. Evidence of Biased Advertising in the Case of Social Egg Freezing. New Bioeth. 2017;23:195–209.PubMedCrossRef Barbey C. Evidence of Biased Advertising in the Case of Social Egg Freezing. New Bioeth. 2017;23:195–209.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Zurück zum Zitat Gurtin ZB, Tiemann E. The marketing of elective egg freezing: A content, cost and quality analysis of UK fertility clinic websites. Reprod Biomed Soc Online. 2021;12:56–68.PubMedCrossRef Gurtin ZB, Tiemann E. The marketing of elective egg freezing: A content, cost and quality analysis of UK fertility clinic websites. Reprod Biomed Soc Online. 2021;12:56–68.PubMedCrossRef
35.
Zurück zum Zitat Beilby K, Dudink I, Kablar D, Kaynak M, Rodrigo S, Hammarberg K. The quality of information about elective oocyte cryopreservation (EOC) on Australian fertility clinic websites. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2020;60:605–9.PubMedCrossRef Beilby K, Dudink I, Kablar D, Kaynak M, Rodrigo S, Hammarberg K. The quality of information about elective oocyte cryopreservation (EOC) on Australian fertility clinic websites. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2020;60:605–9.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Zurück zum Zitat Slater A, Liew R, Peate M. Age-related fertility decline and elective oocyte cryopreservation: Knowledge, attitudes and practices in a pilot study of general practitioners. Aust J Gen Pract. 2022;51:611–9.PubMedCrossRef Slater A, Liew R, Peate M. Age-related fertility decline and elective oocyte cryopreservation: Knowledge, attitudes and practices in a pilot study of general practitioners. Aust J Gen Pract. 2022;51:611–9.PubMedCrossRef
38.
Zurück zum Zitat van de Wiel L. The speculative turn in IVF: egg freezing and the financialization of fertility. New Genet Soc. 2020;39:306–26.CrossRef van de Wiel L. The speculative turn in IVF: egg freezing and the financialization of fertility. New Genet Soc. 2020;39:306–26.CrossRef
40.
Zurück zum Zitat Garvelink MM, et al. Decisional Conflict Scale Use over 20 Years: The Anniversary Review. Med Decis Making. 2019;39:301–14.PubMedCrossRef Garvelink MM, et al. Decisional Conflict Scale Use over 20 Years: The Anniversary Review. Med Decis Making. 2019;39:301–14.PubMedCrossRef
41.
42.
Zurück zum Zitat Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)—A metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42:377–81.PubMedCrossRef Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)—A metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42:377–81.PubMedCrossRef
43.
Zurück zum Zitat Miles MB, Huberman AM. Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. 2nd ed. California: Sage Publications; 1994. Miles MB, Huberman AM. Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. 2nd ed. California: Sage Publications; 1994.
44.
Zurück zum Zitat Stata Statistical Software: Release 15. College Station, TX. StataCorp LLC; 2017. Stata Statistical Software: Release 15. College Station, TX. StataCorp LLC; 2017.
45.
Zurück zum Zitat Pritchard N, et al. Characteristics and circumstances of women in Australia who cryopreserved their oocytes for non-medical indications. J Reprod Infant Psychol. 2017;35:108–18.PubMedCrossRef Pritchard N, et al. Characteristics and circumstances of women in Australia who cryopreserved their oocytes for non-medical indications. J Reprod Infant Psychol. 2017;35:108–18.PubMedCrossRef
46.
Zurück zum Zitat Inhorn MC, et al. Patient-centered elective egg freezing: a binational qualitative study of best practices for women’s quality of care. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2019;36:1081–90.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Inhorn MC, et al. Patient-centered elective egg freezing: a binational qualitative study of best practices for women’s quality of care. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2019;36:1081–90.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
47.
Zurück zum Zitat Inhorn MC, et al. Elective egg freezing and its underlying socio-demography: a binational analysis with global implications. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2018;16:70.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Inhorn MC, et al. Elective egg freezing and its underlying socio-demography: a binational analysis with global implications. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2018;16:70.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
48.
Zurück zum Zitat Collie E, Lew R, Peate M. Merging motherhood and medicine: A qualitative study exploring barriers and enablers to motherhood among female doctors in Australia. Womens Health. 2022;18:17455057221114268. Collie E, Lew R, Peate M. Merging motherhood and medicine: A qualitative study exploring barriers and enablers to motherhood among female doctors in Australia. Womens Health. 2022;18:17455057221114268.
49.
Zurück zum Zitat Nasab S, Shah JS, Nurudeen K, Jooya ND, Abdallah ME, Sibai BM. Physicians' attitudes towards using elective oocyte cryopreservation to accommodate the demands of their career. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2019;36:1935–47.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Nasab S, Shah JS, Nurudeen K, Jooya ND, Abdallah ME, Sibai BM. Physicians' attitudes towards using elective oocyte cryopreservation to accommodate the demands of their career. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2019;36:1935–47.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
50.
Zurück zum Zitat Anspach Will E, Maslow BS, Kaye L, Nulsen J. Increasing awareness of age-related fertility and elective fertility preservation among medical students and house staff: a pre- and post-intervention analysis. Fertil Steril. 2017;107:1200–1205.e1.PubMedCrossRef Anspach Will E, Maslow BS, Kaye L, Nulsen J. Increasing awareness of age-related fertility and elective fertility preservation among medical students and house staff: a pre- and post-intervention analysis. Fertil Steril. 2017;107:1200–1205.e1.PubMedCrossRef
51.
Zurück zum Zitat Hodes-Wertz B, Druckenmiller S, Smith M, Noyes N. What do reproductive-age women who undergo oocyte cryopreservation think about the process as a means to preserve fertility? Fertil Steril. 2013;100:1343–9.PubMedCrossRef Hodes-Wertz B, Druckenmiller S, Smith M, Noyes N. What do reproductive-age women who undergo oocyte cryopreservation think about the process as a means to preserve fertility? Fertil Steril. 2013;100:1343–9.PubMedCrossRef
53.
Zurück zum Zitat Mazza D, Cannold L, Nagle C, McKay F, Brijnath B. Making decisions about fertility : three facts GPs need to communicate to women. Aust Fam Physician. 2012;41:343–6.PubMed Mazza D, Cannold L, Nagle C, McKay F, Brijnath B. Making decisions about fertility : three facts GPs need to communicate to women. Aust Fam Physician. 2012;41:343–6.PubMed
54.
Zurück zum Zitat Hammarberg K, et al. Fertility-related knowledge and information-seeking behaviour among people of reproductive age: a qualitative study. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2017;20:88–95.PubMedCrossRef Hammarberg K, et al. Fertility-related knowledge and information-seeking behaviour among people of reproductive age: a qualitative study. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2017;20:88–95.PubMedCrossRef
55.
Zurück zum Zitat Prior E, Lew R, Hammarberg K, Johnson L. Fertility facts, figures and future plans: an online survey of university students. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2019;22:283–90.PubMedCrossRef Prior E, Lew R, Hammarberg K, Johnson L. Fertility facts, figures and future plans: an online survey of university students. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2019;22:283–90.PubMedCrossRef
56.
Zurück zum Zitat Yee S, Lipton NJ, Fu V, Goodman CV, Librach C. Planned Oocyte Cryopreservation: Outcomes, Motivations, and Involvement of Primary Health Care Providers. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2021;31:285–92.PubMedCrossRef Yee S, Lipton NJ, Fu V, Goodman CV, Librach C. Planned Oocyte Cryopreservation: Outcomes, Motivations, and Involvement of Primary Health Care Providers. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2021;31:285–92.PubMedCrossRef
57.
Zurück zum Zitat Hoffmann TC, et al. Shared decision making: what do clinicians need to know and why should they bother? Med J Aust. 2014;201:35–9.PubMedCrossRef Hoffmann TC, et al. Shared decision making: what do clinicians need to know and why should they bother? Med J Aust. 2014;201:35–9.PubMedCrossRef
58.
Zurück zum Zitat Lew R, Foo J, Kroon B, Boothroyd C, Chapman M. Australasian CREI Consensus Expert Panel on Trial evidence (ACCEPT) Group. ANZSREI consensus statement on elective oocyte cryopreservation. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2019;59:616–26.PubMedCrossRef Lew R, Foo J, Kroon B, Boothroyd C, Chapman M. Australasian CREI Consensus Expert Panel on Trial evidence (ACCEPT) Group. ANZSREI consensus statement on elective oocyte cryopreservation. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2019;59:616–26.PubMedCrossRef
59.
Zurück zum Zitat Saumet J, Petropanagos A, Buzaglo K, McMahon E, Warraich G, Mahutte N. No. 356-Egg Freezing for Age-Related Fertility Decline. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2018;40:356–68.PubMedCrossRef Saumet J, Petropanagos A, Buzaglo K, McMahon E, Warraich G, Mahutte N. No. 356-Egg Freezing for Age-Related Fertility Decline. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2018;40:356–68.PubMedCrossRef
60.
Zurück zum Zitat Gattellari M, Ward J. Will men attribute fault to their GP for adverse effects arising from controversial screening tests? An Australian study using scenarios about PSA screening. J Med Screen. 2004;11:165–9.PubMedCrossRef Gattellari M, Ward J. Will men attribute fault to their GP for adverse effects arising from controversial screening tests? An Australian study using scenarios about PSA screening. J Med Screen. 2004;11:165–9.PubMedCrossRef
61.
Zurück zum Zitat Stacey D, et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;4:CD001431.PubMed Stacey D, et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;4:CD001431.PubMed
64.
Zurück zum Zitat Peate M, et al. Development and pilot testing of a fertility decision aid for young women diagnosed with early breast cancer. Breast J. 2011;17:112–4.PubMedCrossRef Peate M, et al. Development and pilot testing of a fertility decision aid for young women diagnosed with early breast cancer. Breast J. 2011;17:112–4.PubMedCrossRef
65.
Zurück zum Zitat Garvelink MM, Ter Kuile MM, Louwe LA, Hilders C, Stiggelbout AM. Feasibility and effects of a decision aid about fertility preservation. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2017;20:104–12.PubMedCrossRef Garvelink MM, Ter Kuile MM, Louwe LA, Hilders C, Stiggelbout AM. Feasibility and effects of a decision aid about fertility preservation. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2017;20:104–12.PubMedCrossRef
67.
Zurück zum Zitat Seyhan A, Akin OD, Ertaş S, Ata B, Yakin K, Urman B. A Survey of Women Who Cryopreserved Oocytes for Non-medical Indications (Social Fertility Preservation). Reprod Sci. 2021;28:2216–22.PubMedCrossRef Seyhan A, Akin OD, Ertaş S, Ata B, Yakin K, Urman B. A Survey of Women Who Cryopreserved Oocytes for Non-medical Indications (Social Fertility Preservation). Reprod Sci. 2021;28:2216–22.PubMedCrossRef
68.
Zurück zum Zitat Mac Dougall K, Beyene Y, Nachtigall RD. Age shock: misperceptions of the impact of age on fertility before and after IVF in women who conceived after age 40. Hum Reprod. 2012;28:350–6.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Mac Dougall K, Beyene Y, Nachtigall RD. Age shock: misperceptions of the impact of age on fertility before and after IVF in women who conceived after age 40. Hum Reprod. 2012;28:350–6.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
69.
Zurück zum Zitat Fauser BCJM, Boivin J, Barri PN, Tarlatzis BC, Schmidt L, Levy-Toledano R. Beliefs, attitudes and funding of assisted reproductive technology: Public perception of over 6,000 respondents from 6 European countries. PLoS One. 2019;14:e0211150.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Fauser BCJM, Boivin J, Barri PN, Tarlatzis BC, Schmidt L, Levy-Toledano R. Beliefs, attitudes and funding of assisted reproductive technology: Public perception of over 6,000 respondents from 6 European countries. PLoS One. 2019;14:e0211150.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Information and decision support needs: A survey of women interested in receiving planned oocyte cryopreservation information
verfasst von
Sherine Sandhu
Martha Hickey
Sabine Braat
Karin Hammarberg
Raelia Lew
Jane Fisher
William Ledger
Michelle Peate
on behalf of the Eggsurance Collaborative Group
Publikationsdatum
14.04.2023
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics / Ausgabe 6/2023
Print ISSN: 1058-0468
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-7330
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-023-02796-x

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 6/2023

Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 6/2023 Zur Ausgabe

Mehr Lebenszeit mit Abemaciclib bei fortgeschrittenem Brustkrebs?

24.05.2024 Mammakarzinom Nachrichten

In der MONARCHE-3-Studie lebten Frauen mit fortgeschrittenem Hormonrezeptor-positivem, HER2-negativem Brustkrebs länger, wenn sie zusätzlich zu einem nicht steroidalen Aromatasehemmer mit Abemaciclib behandelt wurden; allerdings verfehlte der numerische Zugewinn die statistische Signifikanz.

Blutdrucksenkung könnte Uterusmyome verhindern

Frauen mit unbehandelter oder neu auftretender Hypertonie haben ein deutlich erhöhtes Risiko für Uterusmyome. Eine Therapie mit Antihypertensiva geht hingegen mit einer verringerten Inzidenz der gutartigen Tumoren einher.

„Übersichtlicher Wegweiser“: Lauterbachs umstrittener Klinik-Atlas ist online

17.05.2024 Klinik aktuell Nachrichten

Sie sei „ethisch geboten“, meint Gesundheitsminister Karl Lauterbach: mehr Transparenz über die Qualität von Klinikbehandlungen. Um sie abzubilden, lässt er gegen den Widerstand vieler Länder einen virtuellen Klinik-Atlas freischalten.

Antikörper-Wirkstoff-Konjugat hält solide Tumoren in Schach

16.05.2024 Zielgerichtete Therapie Nachrichten

Trastuzumab deruxtecan scheint auch jenseits von Lungenkrebs gut gegen solide Tumoren mit HER2-Mutationen zu wirken. Dafür sprechen die Daten einer offenen Pan-Tumor-Studie.

Update Gynäkologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.