Treatment preferences and trade-offs for ovulation induction in clomiphene citrate–resistant patients with polycystic ovary syndrome

Driving factors in treatment decision-making of patients seeking medical assistance for infertility: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

ART differs in effectiveness, side-effects, administration, and costs. To improve the decision-making process, we need to understand what factors patients consider to be most important.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

We conducted this systematic review to assess which aspects of ART treatment (effectiveness, safety, burden, costs, patient-centeredness, and genetic parenthood) are most important in the decision-making of patients with an unfulfilled wish to have a child.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched studies indexed in Embase, PubMed, PsycINFO, and CINAHL prior to November 2023. Discrete choice experiments (DCEs), surveys, interviews, and conjoint analyses (CAs) about ART were included. Studies were included if they described two or more of the following attributes: effectiveness, safety, burden, costs, patient-centeredness, and genetic parenthood.Participants were men and women with an unfulfilled wish to have a child. From each DCE/CA study, we extracted the beta-coefficients and calculated the relative importance of treatment attributes or, in case of survey studies, extracted results. We assessed the risk of bias using the rating developed by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation working group. Attributes were classified into effectiveness, safety, burden, costs, patient-centeredness, genetic parenthood, and others.

OUTCOMES

The search identified 938 studies of which 20 were included: 13 DCEs, three survey studies, three interview studies, and one conjoint analysis, with a total of 12 452 patients. Per study, 47-100% of the participants were women. Studies were assessed as having moderate to high risk of bias (critical: six studies, serious: four studies, moderate: nine studies, low: one study). The main limitation was the heterogeneity in the questionnaires and methodology utilized. Studies varied in the number and types of assessed attributes. Patients' treatment decision-making was mostly driven by effectiveness, followed by safety, burden, costs, and patient-centeredness. Effectiveness was rated as the first or second most important factor in 10 of the 12 DCE studies (83%) and the relative importance of effectiveness varied between 17% and 63%, with a median of 34% (moderate certainty of evidence). Of eight studies evaluating safety, five studies valued safety as the first or second most important factor (63%), and the relative importance ranged from 8% to 35% (median 23%) (moderate certainty of evidence). Cost was rated as first or second most important in five of 10 studies, and the importance relative to the other attributes varied between 5% and 47% (median 23%) (moderate certainty of evidence). Burden was rated as first or second by three of 10 studies (30%) and the relative importance varied between 1% and 43% (median 13%) (low certainty of evidence). Patient-centeredness was second most important in one of five studies (20%) and had a relative importance between 7% and 24% (median 14%) (low certainty of evidence). Results suggest that patients are prepared to trade-off some effectiveness for more safety, or less burden and patient-centeredness. When safety was evaluated, the safety of the child was considered more important than the mother's safety. Greater burden (cycle cancellations, number of injections, number of hospital visits, time) was more likely to be accepted by patients if they gained effectiveness, safety, or lower costs. Concerning patient-centeredness, information provision and physician attitude were considered most important, followed by involvement in decision-making, and treatment continuity by the same medical professional. Non-genetic parenthood did not have a clear impact on decision-making.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

The findings of this review can be used in future preference studies and can help healthcare professionals in guiding patients' decision-making and enable a more patient-centered approach.

The perspective of women with an increased risk of OHSS regarding the safety and burden of IVF: a discrete choice experiment

STUDY QUESTION

What are the preferences of women with an increased risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) for characteristics of IVF treatments?

SUMMARY ANSWER

In women with increased risk of OHSS, the chance of OHSS is a strong attribute in determining women's preference for IVF treatment and women are willing to trade off burden (side effects), costs and chance of pregnancy for lower risks of OHSS.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

OHSS is the most serious iatrogenic complication of ovarian stimulation. Polycystic ovaries, high antral follicle count (AFC) and previous OHSS increase the risk of developing OHSS. IVM of oocytes offers great potential for patients with high AFC, since there is no risk of OHSS. With regard to patients' perspectives on fertility treatments, it has been shown that women undergoing IVF place different values on treatment characteristics, such as effectiveness (pregnancy rate), cancellation risk, safety (OHSS risk) and burden (side effects). To our knowledge, the preferences for different IVF treatments in women with increased risk of OHSS have not been studied yet.

STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION

A multicentre discrete choice experiment (DCE) was performed between 2012 and 2016. The selected attributes offered were chance of OHSS, which represents safety; number of injections; chance of cycle cancellation (the latter two represent burden); chance of pregnancy; and out-of-pocket costs/willingness to pay. A target sample size was calculated by including 20 patients for five attributes resulting in the aim to include 100 women.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS

We invited subfertile women who were diagnosed with normogonadotrophic ovulation disorder and were undergoing treatment with gonadotrophins and/or had experienced (imminent) OHSS in a previous IVF treatment in the fertility clinic of four hospitals (three teaching and one academic). Women received a printed questionnaire with fictional scenarios and were asked, for each scenario, to choose their preferred treatment. We used a multinominal logit model to determine the preferences of women and investigated heterogeneity in preferences through latent class analysis. The decrease in OHSS risk required for women to accept an increased level of an undesirable attribute, i.e. their willingness to trade off, was calculated.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

We distributed 120 questionnaires with a response rate of 79% (95/120). There were 91 questionnaires included in the analysis. All five attributes influenced women's treatment preference. About half of the women considered chance of pregnancy to be more important, while the other half considered prevention of OHSS and lower costs to be more important. Women were willing to trade off cancellation rate, number of injections, chance of pregnancy and costs for lower OHSS chances. We found that women were willing to accept 5% more chance on cycle cancellation if the OHSS rate dropped with 2%. Women were willing to accept one extra treatment for a reduction of 3.9% in OHSS risk. With respect to costs, women were willing to pay €1000 instead of no costs for a decrease in OHSS rate of 5.4%.

LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION

The sample size of our study is relatively small which may limit the generalizability and sensitivity of the study.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

The results of this DCE help us to understand the trade-off that women at risk of OHSS make in their preference for characteristics on IVF treatments. This knowledge may be used during the counselling of couples about their treatment options.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS

B.W.M. is supported by a NHMRC Practitioner Fellowship (GNT1082548). B.W.M. reports consultancy for Merck, ObsEva and Guerbet. J.P.d.B. reports personal fees from the Ferring Medical Advisory Board and grants from Ferring B. V and Merck Serono B. V outside the submitted work. There are no other conflicts of interest to declare.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

None.

Using the Threshold Technique to Elicit Patient Preferences: An Introduction to the Method and an Overview of Existing Empirical Applications

Patient preference information (PPI) is a topic of interest to regulators and industry. One of many known methods for eliciting PPI is the threshold technique (TT). However, empirical studies of the TT differ from each other in many ways and no effort to date has been made to summarize them or the evidence regarding the performance of the method. We sought to describe the TT and summarize the empirical applications of the method. Forty-three studies were reviewed. Most studies estimated the minimum level of benefit required to make a treatment worthwhile, and over half estimated the maximum level of risk patients would accept to achieve a treatment benefit. The evidence demonstrates that the TT can be used to elicit multiple types of thresholds and can be used to explore preference heterogeneity and preference non-linearity. Some evidence suggests that the method may be sensitive to anchoring and shift-framing effects; however, no evidence suggests that the method is more or less sensitive to these potential biases than other stated-preference methods. The TT may be a viable method for eliciting PPI to support regulatory decision-making; however, additional understanding of the performance of this method may be needed. Future research should focus on TT performance compared with other stated-preference methods, the extent to which results predict patient choice, and the ability of the TT to inform individual treatment decisions at the point of healthcare delivery.

Ovarian drilling in polycystic ovary syndrome: Long term pregnancy rate

Objective

To report long term pregnancy rate in polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) treated by ovarian drilling. To evaluate predictive factors of pregnancy and possibility of a second drilling.

Design

Retrospective, observational, multicenter study.

Setting

Gynecologic departments of two teaching's hospitals.

Patients

All infertile women with PCOS who were treated by ovarian drilling from 2004 to 2013. The Rotterdam criteria were applied to define PCOS.

Interventions

Surgical ovarian drilling by laparoscopy and trans vaginal hydro laparoscopy.

Main Outcome Measures

The primary endpoint was pregnancy rate after ovarian drilling. The secondary endpoints were the predictive factors of pregnancy and the possibility of a second ovarian drilling.

Results

289 women were included in the study. The mean follow-up period was 28.4 months (25.3-31.5). A pregnancy was obtained in at least 137 (47.4%) women after a drilling, and 71 (51.8%) of these pregnancies were spontaneous, 48 (16.6%) women achieved at least two pregnancies after drilling, and 27 (56.3%) of these were spontaneous. The predictive factors for effectiveness were a normal body mass index (BMI), an infertility period of less than three years, an AFC of less than 50, and an age of less than 35. Second drillings were performed on 33 women. Among them, 19 (57.6%) achieved at least one pregnancy, and 10 (52.6%) of these were spontaneous. It appeared that a second drilling was effective either when the first drilling had been successful (pregnancy achieved after drilling) or when it had failed in cases of high AFC (greater than 55).

Conclusion

Ovarian drilling permitted to obtain spontaneous pregnancy for women with PCOS. This surgery could have durably effect permitted to obtain more than one pregnancy.

The relative importance of genetic parenthood

RESEARCH QUESTION

How much do patients with severe infertility and their gynaecologists value genetic parenthood relative to other key treatment characteristics?

DESIGN

A discrete choice experiment included the following treatment characteristics: genetic parenthood, pregnancy rate, curing infertility, maternal health, child health and costs. The questionnaire was disseminated between 2015 and 2016 among Dutch and Belgian patients with severe infertility and their gynaecologists.

RESULTS

The questionnaire was completed by 173 patients and 111 gynaecologists. When choosing between treatments that varied in safety, effectiveness and costs, the treatment's ability to lead to genetic parenthood did not affect the treatment preference of patients with severe infertility (n = 173). Genetic parenthood affected the treatment preference of gynaecologists (n = 111) less than all other treatment characteristics. Patients indicated that they would switch to a treatment that did not enable genetic parenthood in return for a child health risk reduction of 3.6%, a cost reduction of €3500, an ovarian hyperstimulation risk reduction of 4.6%, a maternal cancer risk reduction of 2.7% or a pregnancy rate increase of 18%. Gynaecologists made similar trade-offs.

CONCLUSIONS

While awaiting replication of this study in larger populations, these findings challenge the presumed dominant importance of genetic parenthood. This raises questions about whether donor gametes could be presented as a worthy alternative earlier in treatment trajectories and whether investments in novel treatments enabling genetic parenthood, like in-vitro gametogenesis, are proportional to their future clinical effect.

Women's perspectives on ovulation induction with or without IUI as treatment for normogonadotrophic anovulation: a discrete choice experiment

Study Question

What are the treatment preferences of women with normogonadotrophic anovulation treated with ovulation induction with or without intrauterine insemination (IUI)?

Summary Answer

Women with normogonadotrophic anovulation differ in their treatment preference; half of them base their preference on the lowest burden and half of them on the highest effectiveness.

What is Known Already

Common treatments for anovulatory women who wish to conceive are ovulation induction using clomiphene citrate or letrozole taken in tablet form or with injections containing gonadotrophins, all optionally combined with IUI. Patient preferences for these alternatives have not yet been examined in these women.

Study Design, Size, and Duration

Between August 2014 and February 2017 we conducted a multicentre discrete choice experiment (DCE). The target sample size was calculated by including 20 women for six attributes in the main analysis resulting in the inclusion of 120 women to be able to assess heterogeneity across choices.

Participants/Materials, Setting, Methods

We invited treatment-naive women diagnosed with normogonadotropic anovulation and visiting the outpatient clinic of five Dutch centers (three teaching hospitals and two university hospitals) to participate in the DCE by completing a printed questionnaire. We asked women to indicate their preference in hypothetical alternative treatment scenarios by offering a series of choice sets from which they were to choose their preferred alternatives. The choice sets contained several treatment characteristics of interest, i.e. attributes concerning ovulation induction with clomiphene citrate or letrozole versus gonadotrophins, as well as intercourse and IUI. We selected six attributes: number of visits to the outpatient clinic during treatment; type of medication; intercourse or IUI; risk of side effects; willingness to pay; and pregnancy chances leading to the birth of a child after six treatment cycles.

We used a multinominal logit model to determine the preferences of women and investigated heterogeneity in preferences through latent class analysis. To determine if women were willing to make a trade-off for higher pregnancy rates at the expense of a higher burden, we calculated the marginal rate of substitution.

Main Results and the Role of Chance

The questionnaire was completed by 145 women. All six attributes influenced women’s treatment preferences and those valued as most important were low risk of side effects, a minimal number of hospital visits and intercourse. A total of 55% of women were driven by the wish to conceive with the least medical interference and lowest burden. The remaining women were success driven and chose mainly for the highest chances to conceive, regardless of the burden. Age and duration of subfertility did not significantly differ between these women. Women were willing to trade-off some burden and costs for higher pregnancy chances.

Limitations Reasons for Caution

The sample size of our study is relatively small which made it not possible to perform interaction tests and subgroup analyses.

Wider Implications of the Findings

Our results may be used during the counseling of couples about their treatment options. These findings are an argument to explore if a woman prefers potentially fast success or a medically less intense route that might take longer. The preference for the less intense route would lead to the continuation of ovulation induction with oral drugs such as clomiphene citrate or letrozole rather than treatment with injected gonadotrophins, or even IVF.

Study Funding/Competing Interest(s)

B.W.M. is supported by a NHMRC Practitioner Fellowship (GNT1082548). B.W.M. reports consultancy for Merck, ObsEva and Guerbet. CBL reports grants from Merck and Ferring.

Trial Registration Number

None.

Couples with non-obstructive azoospermia are interested in future treatments with artificial gametes

STUDY QUESTION

Would couples diagnosed with non-obstructive azoospermia (NOA) consider two future treatments with artificial gametes (AGs) as alternatives for testicular sperm extraction followed by ICSI (TESE-ICSI)?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Most couples with NOA (89%) would opt for treatment with AGs before attempting TESE-ICSI and/or after failed TESE-ICSI.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Couples with NOA who undergo TESE-ICSI have a 25% chance of conceiving a child. Two future treatments that are being developed are 'ICSI with artificial sperm formed from somatic cells' (ICSI with AGs) and 'natural conception after autotransplantation of in vitro proliferated spermatogonial stem cells' (natural conception with AGs). It is unknown what treatment preferences patients have.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

A cross-sectional survey conducted in 2012-2013, addressing all 921 couples diagnosed with NOA and treated with TESE-ICSI in Dutch fertility clinics between 2007 and 2012. The coded questionnaires were sent by mail and followed up with two reminders.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

We developed the questionnaire based on a literature review and previous qualitative interviews, and included treatment preference and the valuation of nine treatment characteristics. We assessed reliability of the questionnaires and calculated mean importance scores (MISs: 0-10) of each treatment characteristic. We assessed which patient and treatment characteristics were associated with a couple's hypothetical treatment preference using binominal regression.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The vast majority (89%) of the 494 responding couples (response rate: 54%) would potentially opt for AGs as a first and/or a last resort treatment option. More specifically, as a first treatment couples were likely (67%) to prefer natural conception with AGs over TESE-ICSI and less likely to prefer ICSI with AGs over TESE-ICSI (34%). After failed TESE-ICSI, the majority of couples (75%) would want to attempt ICSI with AGs as a last resort option. The most important characteristics of treatment were safety for children (MIS: 8.2), pregnancy rates (MIS: 7.7) and curing infertility (MIS: 6.8). Costs, burden, naturalness and technological sophistication were of about equal importance (MIS: 3.1-4.0). The majority of patients rated conception at home and moral acceptability as not important (MIS: 1.7 and 0.8, respectively), but the importance attributed to these variables did still affect patients' likeliness to opt for AGs.

LIMITATIONS AND REASONS FOR CAUTION

Couples with NOA not opting for TESE-ICSI were not included and might have other perspectives. Couples' hypothetical choices for AGs might differ from their actual choices once data on the costs, safety and pregnancy rates become available from these new treatment options.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

The interest of couples with NOA in potential future treatments with AGs encourages further pre-clinical research. Priority setting for research and future decision-making on clinical application of AGs should take all characteristics important to patients into account.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS

The authors report no financial or other conflict of interest relevant to the subject of this article.

The M-OVIN study: does switching treatment to FSH and / or IUI lead to higher pregnancy rates in a subset of women with world health organization type II anovulation not conceiving after six ovulatory cycles with clomiphene citrate - a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Clomiphene citrate (CC) is first line treatment in women with World Health Organization (WHO) type II anovulation and polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). Whereas 60% to 85% of these women will ovulate on CC, only about one half will have conceived after six cycles. If women do not conceive, treatment can be continued with gonadotropins or intra-uterine insemination (IUI). At present, it is unclear for how many cycles ovulation induction with CC should be repeated, and when to switch to ovulation induction with gonadotropins and/or IUI.

METHODS/DESIGN

We started a multicenter randomised controlled trial in the Netherlands comparing six cycles of CC plus intercourse or six cycles of gonadotrophins plus intercourse or six cycles of CC plus IUI or six cycles of gonadotrophins plus IUI.Women with WHO type II anovulation who ovulate but did not conceive after six ovulatory cycles of CC with a maximum of 150 mg daily for five days will be included.Our primary outcome is birth of a healthy child resulting from a pregnancy that was established in the first eight months after randomisation. Secondary outcomes are clinical pregnancy, miscarriage, multiple pregnancy and treatment costs. The analysis will be performed according to the intention to treat principle. Two comparisons will be made, one in which CC is compared to gonadotrophins and one in which the addition of IUI is compared to ovulation induction only. Assuming a live birth rate of 40% after CC, 55% after addition of IUI and 55% after ovulation induction with gonadotrophins, with an alpha of 5% and a power of 80%, we need to recruit 200 women per arm (800 women in total).An independent Data and Safety Monitoring Committee has criticized the data of the first 150 women and concluded that a sample size re-estimation should be performed after including 320 patients (i.e. 80 per arm).

DISCUSSION

The trial will provide evidence on the most effective, safest and most cost effective treatment in women with WHO type II anovulation who do not conceive after six ovulatory cycles with CC with a maximum of 150 mg daily for five days. This evidence could imply the need for changing our guidelines, which may cause a shift in large practice variation to evidence based primary treatment for these women.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Netherlands Trial register NTR1449.

Willingness to pay and conjoint analysis to determine women's preferences for ovarian stimulating hormones in the treatment of infertility in Spain

BACKGROUND

Despite many advances in assisted reproductive techniques (ART), little is known about preferences for technological developments of women undergoing fertility treatments. The aims of this study were to investigate the preferences of infertile women undergoing ART for controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) treatments; to determine the utility values ascribed to different attributes of COS treatments; and to estimate women's willingness to pay (WTP) for COS.

METHODS

A representative sample of ambulatory patients ready to receive, or receiving, COS therapies for infertility were recruited from seven specialized private centres in six autonomous communities in Spain. Descriptive, inferential and conjoint analyses (CA) were used to elicit preferences and WTP. Attributes and levels of COS treatments were identified by literature review and two focus groups with experts and patients. WTP valuations were derived by a combination of double-bounded (closed-ended) and open questions and contingent ranking methods.

RESULTS

In total, 160 patients [mean (standard deviation; SD) age: 35.8 (4.2) years] were interviewed. Over half of the participants (55.0%) had a high level of education (university degree), most (78.8%) were married and half (50.0%) had an estimated net income of >€1502 per month and had paid a mean (SD) €1194.17 (€778.29) for their most recent hormonal treatment. The most frequent causes of infertility were related to sperm abnormalities (50.3%). In 30.6% of cases, there were two causes of infertility. The maximum WTP for COS treatment was €800 (median) per cycle; 35.5% were willing to pay an additional €101-€300 for a 1-2% effectiveness gain in the treatment. Utility values (CA) showed that effectiveness was the most valued attribute (39.82), followed by costs (18.74), safety (17.75) and information sharing with physicians (14.93).

CONCLUSIONS

WTP for COS therapies exceeds current cost. Additional WTP exists for 1-2% effectiveness improvement. Effectiveness and costs were the most important determinants of preferences, followed by safety and information sharing with physicians.

The patients' perspective on fertility care: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Patient-centered reproductive medicine (PCRM) is important for quality of care, and this is increasingly being recognized. However, its scientific basis is unclear. The main research questions addressed in this review are: 'How has the patients' perspective on fertility care been examined (method and quality)?' and 'What is the perspective of patients in developed countries on fertility care?'.

METHODS

A systematic search of electronic databases was conducted and inclusion criteria with respect to eligibility and quality were applied. The methodology of the studies was critically appraised; the findings of the studies were synthesized and organized according to: patients' value clarification and assessment of service quality and dimensions of patient-centeredness. Additionally data on patient preferences and determinants of patients' perspective on care were collected.

RESULTS

In 51 selected studies, patients' perspective on fertility care was examined with (few or many item) questionnaires and/or qualitative interviews. Significant methodological problems were observed. Fertility patients attached importance to seven out of eight dimensions of patient-centeredness (Picker institute) and two new dimensions 'fertility clinic staff' and 'skills' were developed. Overall, fertility patients want to be treated like human beings with a need for: medical skills, respect, coordination, accessibility, information, comfort, support, partner involvement and a good attitude of and relationship with fertility clinic staff. Patients' preferences between procedures and demographic, medical and psychological determinants of their perspective were defined.

CONCLUSIONS

Fertility patients have 'human needs' besides their need for medical care. Evidence on PCRM is available but significant methodological limitations call for the development and validation of a European questionnaire.

Expectant parents' preferences for mode of delivery and trade-offs of outcomes for breech presentation

OBJECTIVE

To assess patients' preferences and trade-offs for mode of delivery in case of breech presentation at term.

METHODS

Eighty women (40 with a foetus in breech presentation and 40 with a foetus in cephalic presentation) with a gestational age from 36 weeks onwards were offered scenarios of vaginal and caesarean breech delivery in which 1-month and 2-year neonatal and maternal complication rates were varied; expectant fathers (when present) were interviewed separately. Thresholds for complication rates where patients switch preferences were visualised graphically in trade-off curves. Differences in preference thresholds were tested using the Wilcoxon signed ranks test.

RESULTS

Caesarean delivery was the preferred mode of delivery for breech presentation in 65% of the patients interviewed. The trade-off questions showed that the 2-year neonatal outcome after breech delivery was the most important outcome for the mothers, whereas the fathers were more influenced by the maternal outcome.

CONCLUSION

When realistic assumptions for complications are made, most women prefer a caesarean delivery over vaginal delivery for at term breech presentation. In the balance of pros and cons, 2-year neonatal outcome is the most important factor in the decision between caesarean and vaginal delivery.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The results of this study can be used by the clinician to help patients weigh risk, benefit, and potential harm with regard to breech delivery.

Coming soon to your clinic: patient-friendly ART

The current practice in medically assisted reproduction is still too exclusively focused on effectiveness and success rates. This has a number of considerable, and more importantly, avoidable drawbacks. Single embryo transfer was an important move away from this model to include safety and welfare of mother and child. Patient-friendly ART goes one big step further. It is composed of a mix of four criteria: cost-effectiveness, equity of access, minimal risk for mother and child and minimal burden for patients. All four components have a strong normative ethical basis: cost-effectiveness relies on the optimal use of community resources to maximise well-being; equity of access is based on justice, minimal risk is founded on the fundamental non-maleficence rule and minimal burden is largely based on the autonomy principle. The inclusion of the four criteria in decision-making about treatment would express these values in clinical practice.

Patients' preferences for intrauterine insemination or in-vitro fertilization

Patients' preferences for intrauterine insemination (IUI) relative to IVF were assessed using trade-off interviews, and the number of IUI cycles they would undergo before changing to IVF. A total of 73 couples undergoing IUI with a total of 111 interviews were included. Scenarios were offered where pregnancy chance after IUI was varied against a fixed pregnancy rate after IVF. The impact of multiple pregnancy risk on the couple's preference was also investigated. Interviews were held before starting IUI, after three or four IUI cycles and after six IUI cycles. With decreasing probability of ongoing pregnancy after IUI, an increasing number of couples switched their preference from IUI to IVF. This switch occurred after six cycles at a significantly higher (P = 0.01) mean cumulative pregnancy rate (53%) compared with other groups (31%). With increasing risk of multiple pregnancy, preference for IUI declined only slightly, with mean risks of 73, 78 and 83% of a multiple pregnancy for the three groups respectively. In conclusion, at baseline and after three cycles of IUI the majority of couples undergoing IUI preferred continuation of IUI over IVF. A clear shift in preference towards IVF occurred after six cycles. Risk of multiple pregnancy did not affect preference for IUI with ovarian stimulation.