Can an educational DVD improve the acceptability of elective single embryo transfer? A randomized controlled study

Knowledge, attitude, and practice of embryo transfer among women who underwent in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer

Introduction

The infertile patient's knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP) toward embryo transfer may affect treatment outcomes and the mental health of women who underwent in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET). This study aimed to investigate the KAP of embryo transfer among women who underwent IVF-ET.

Methods

This cross-sectional study was conducted on women who underwent IVF-ET at our Hospital between May 2023 and November 2023, using a self-designed questionnaire.

Results

A total of 614 valid questionnaires were finally included. The mean KAP scores were 19.46 ± 5.06 (possible range: 0 28), 39.41 ± 5.20 (possible range: 12-60), and 48.02 ± 6.75 (possible range: 0-60), respectively. The structural equation model demonstrated that knowledge has a direct effect on attitude (β = 0.27, p < 0.001) and attitude has a direct effect on practice (β = 0.55, p < 0.001) and anxiety (β = 0.59, p < 0.001). Moreover, multivariable linear regression analysis showed that anxiety score [coefficient = 0.09, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.03-0.16, p = 0.003], BMI (coefficient = 0.09, 95%CI: 0.03-0.16, p = 0.003), education (coefficient = 5.65-6.17, 95%CI: 1.09-10.7, p < 0.05), monthly per capita income (coefficient = 1.20-1.96, 95% CI: 0.21-3.07, p = 0.05), reasons for IVF (coefficient = -1.33-1.19, 95% CI: -2.49-0.09, p < 0.05), and more than 5 years of infertility (coefficient = -1.12, 95% CI: -2.11-0.13, p = 0.026) were independently associated with sufficient knowledge. Knowledge (coefficient = 0.19, 95% CI: 0.12-0.26, p < 0.001), anxiety (coefficient = 0.39, 95% CI: 0.34-0.45, p < 0.001), monthly per capita household income >10,000 (coefficient = 1.52, 95% CI: 0.61-2.43, p < 0.001), and three or more cycles of embryo transfer (coefficient = -2.69, 95% CI: -3.94-1.43, p < 0.001) were independently associated with active attitude. Furthermore, attitude (coefficient = 0.21, 95% CI: 0.11-0.30, p < 0.001) and anxiety (coefficient = 0.57, 95% CI: 0.49-0.65, p < 0.001) were independently associated with proactive practice.

Discussion

Women who underwent IVF-ET had inadequate knowledge and negative attitudes but proactive practice toward embryo transfer, which were affected by anxiety, income, and reasons for IVF. It is necessary to strengthen the continuous improvement of patient education to improve the management of embryo transfer.

Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions

BACKGROUND

Patient decision aids are interventions designed to support people making health decisions. At a minimum, patient decision aids make the decision explicit, provide evidence-based information about the options and associated benefits/harms, and help clarify personal values for features of options. This is an update of a Cochrane review that was first published in 2003 and last updated in 2017.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of patient decision aids in adults considering treatment or screening decisions using an integrated knowledge translation approach.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted the updated search for the period of 2015 (last search date) to March 2022 in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, EBSCO, and grey literature. The cumulative search covers database origins to March 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included published randomized controlled trials comparing patient decision aids to usual care. Usual care was defined as general information, risk assessment, clinical practice guideline summaries for health consumers, placebo intervention (e.g. information on another topic), or no intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened citations for inclusion, extracted intervention and outcome data, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Primary outcomes, based on the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS), were attributes related to the choice made (informed values-based choice congruence) and the decision-making process, such as knowledge, accurate risk perceptions, feeling informed, clear values, participation in decision-making, and adverse events. Secondary outcomes were choice, confidence in decision-making, adherence to the chosen option, preference-linked health outcomes, and impact on the healthcare system (e.g. consultation length). We pooled results using mean differences (MDs) and risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), applying a random-effects model. We conducted a subgroup analysis of 105 studies that were included in the previous review version compared to those published since that update (n = 104 studies). We used Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

This update added 104 new studies for a total of 209 studies involving 107,698 participants. The patient decision aids focused on 71 different decisions. The most common decisions were about cardiovascular treatments (n = 22 studies), cancer screening (n = 17 studies colorectal, 15 prostate, 12 breast), cancer treatments (e.g. 15 breast, 11 prostate), mental health treatments (n = 10 studies), and joint replacement surgery (n = 9 studies). When assessing risk of bias in the included studies, we rated two items as mostly unclear (selective reporting: 100 studies; blinding of participants/personnel: 161 studies), due to inadequate reporting. Of the 209 included studies, 34 had at least one item rated as high risk of bias. There was moderate-certainty evidence that patient decision aids probably increase the congruence between informed values and care choices compared to usual care (RR 1.75, 95% CI 1.44 to 2.13; 21 studies, 9377 participants). Regarding attributes related to the decision-making process and compared to usual care, there was high-certainty evidence that patient decision aids result in improved participants' knowledge (MD 11.90/100, 95% CI 10.60 to 13.19; 107 studies, 25,492 participants), accuracy of risk perceptions (RR 1.94, 95% CI 1.61 to 2.34; 25 studies, 7796 participants), and decreased decisional conflict related to feeling uninformed (MD -10.02, 95% CI -12.31 to -7.74; 58 studies, 12,104 participants), indecision about personal values (MD -7.86, 95% CI -9.69 to -6.02; 55 studies, 11,880 participants), and proportion of people who were passive in decision-making (clinician-controlled) (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.88; 21 studies, 4348 participants). For adverse outcomes, there was high-certainty evidence that there was no difference in decision regret between the patient decision aid and usual care groups (MD -1.23, 95% CI -3.05 to 0.59; 22 studies, 3707 participants). Of note, there was no difference in the length of consultation when patient decision aids were used in preparation for the consultation (MD -2.97 minutes, 95% CI -7.84 to 1.90; 5 studies, 420 participants). When patient decision aids were used during the consultation with the clinician, the length of consultation was 1.5 minutes longer (MD 1.50 minutes, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.20; 8 studies, 2702 participants). We found the same direction of effect when we compared results for patient decision aid studies reported in the previous update compared to studies conducted since 2015.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared to usual care, across a wide variety of decisions, patient decision aids probably helped more adults reach informed values-congruent choices. They led to large increases in knowledge, accurate risk perceptions, and an active role in decision-making. Our updated review also found that patient decision aids increased patients' feeling informed and clear about their personal values. There was no difference in decision regret between people using decision aids versus those receiving usual care. Further studies are needed to assess the impact of patient decision aids on adherence and downstream effects on cost and resource use.

Single-embryo transfer implies quality of care in reproductive medicine

This review appraises evidence on the difference between single- and double-embryo transfer (SET, DET) in assisted reproductive technology (ART) regarding the four healthcare quality dimensions most important to fertility patients and doctors. Regarding safety, not only does DET create the uncontested perinatal risks of twin pregnancies, but compelling evidence has added that singleton pregnancies after a vanishing twin also have poorer perinatal outcomes. SET is as effective as DET, as shown by meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials, comparing two cycles of SET versus DET and shown by cumulative live birth rates of entire ART trajectories of up to six cycles. Proposing SET, which is safer than DET and as effective, as the gold standard is not irreconcilable with patient-centred care if patients are thoroughly informed on the reasoning behind the proposition and welcomed to challenge whether it fits their personal values. The cost-efficiency of SET is clearly higher, which has even induced certain countries to start reimbursing ART on the condition that SET is used. In conclusion, SET should be the gold standard offered to all patients. The question is not whether to apply SET but how to apply it in terms of patient selection, patient-centred counselling and coverage of treatment.

The parent trap: desire for multifetal gestation among patients treated for infertility

Objective

To evaluate predictors for patient preference regarding multifetal or singleton gestation among women presenting for infertility care.

Design

Cross-sectional study.

Setting

Academic university hospital-based infertility clinic.

Patient(s)

Five hundred thirty-nine female patients with infertility who presented for their initial visit.

Main outcome measure(s)

Demographic characteristics, infertility history, insurance coverage, desired treatment outcome, acceptability of multifetal reduction, and knowledge of the risks of multifetal pregnancies were assessed using a previously published 41-question survey. Univariate analysis was performed to assess patient factors associated with the desire for multiple births. Independent factors associated with this desire were subsequently assessed by multivariate logistic regression analysis.

Result(s)

Nearly a third of women preferred multiples over a singleton gestation. Nulliparity, lower annual household income, older maternal age, marital status, larger ideal family size, openness to multifetal reduction, and lack of knowledge of the maternal/fetal risks of twin pregnancies were associated with pregnancy desire. Older age (OR (95% CI) 1.66 (1.20–2.29)), nulliparity (OR (95% CI) 0.34 (0.20–0.58)), larger ideal family size (OR (95% CI) 2.34 (1.73–3.14)), and lesser knowledge of multifetal pregnancy risk (OR (95% CI) 0.67 (0.55–0.83)) were independently associated with desire.

Conclusion(s)

A large number of patients undergoing fertility treatment desire multifetal gestation. Although a lack of understanding of the risks associated with higher order pregnancies contributes to this desire, additional individual specific variables also contribute to this trend. Efforts to reduce the incidence of multiples should focus not only on patient education on comparative risks of multiples vs singleton pregnancies but also account for individual specific reservations.

Assisted Reproductive Technology Surveillance - United States, 2018

Problem/Condition

Since the first U.S. infant conceived with assisted reproductive technology (ART) was born in 1981, both the use of ART and the number of fertility clinics providing ART services have increased steadily in the United States. ART includes fertility treatments in which eggs or embryos are handled in the laboratory (i.e., in vitro fertilization [IVF] and related procedures). Although the majority of infants conceived through ART are singletons, women who undergo ART procedures are more likely than women who conceive naturally to have multiple births because multiple embryos might be transferred. Multiple births can pose substantial risks for both mothers and infants, including obstetric complications, preterm birth (<37 weeks), and low birthweight (<2,500 g). This report provides state-specific information for the United States (including the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico) on ART procedures performed in 2018 and compares birth outcomes that occurred in 2018 (resulting from ART procedures performed in 2017 and 2018) with outcomes for all infants born in the United States in 2018.

Period Covered

2018.

Description of System

In 1995, CDC began collecting data on ART procedures performed in fertility clinics in the United States as mandated by the Fertility Clinic Success Rate and Certification Act of 1992 (Public Law 102–493 [October 24, 1992]). Data are collected through the National ART Surveillance System (NASS), a web-based data collection system developed by CDC. This report includes data from the 50 U.S. states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico.

Results

In 2018, a total of 203,119 ART procedures (range: 196 in Alaska to 26,028 in California) were performed in 456 U.S. fertility clinics and reported to CDC. These procedures resulted in 73,831 live-birth deliveries (range: 76 in Puerto Rico and Wyoming to 9,666 in California) and 81,478 infants born (range: 84 in Wyoming to 10,620 in California). Nationally, among women aged 15–44 years, the rate of ART procedures performed was 3,135 per 1 million women. ART use exceeded 1.5 times the national rate in seven states (Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Rhode Island) and the District of Columbia. ART use rates exceeded the national rate in an additional seven states (California, Delaware, Hawaii, New Hampshire, Utah, Vermont, and Virginia).

Nationally, among all ART transfer procedures, the average number of embryos transferred was similar across age groups (1.3 among women aged <35 years, 1.3 among women aged 35–37 years, and 1.4 among women aged >37 years). The national single-embryo transfer (SET) rate among all embryo-transfer procedures was 74.1% among women aged <35 years (range: 28.2% in Puerto Rico to 89.5% in Delaware), 72.8% among women aged 35–37 years (range: 30.6% in Puerto Rico to 93.7% in Delaware), and 66.4% among women aged >37 years (range: 27.1% in Puerto Rico to 85.3% in Delaware).

In 2018, ART contributed to 2.0% of all infants born in the United States (range: 0.4% in Puerto Rico to 5.1% in Massachusetts) from procedures performed in 2017 and 2018. Approximately 78.6% of ART-conceived infants were singleton infants. Overall, ART contributed to 12.5% of all multiple births, including 12.5% of all twin births and 13.3% of all triplets and higher-order births. ART-conceived twins accounted for approximately 97.1% (15,532 of 16,001) of all ART-conceived multiple births. The percentage of multiple births was higher among infants conceived with ART (21.4%) than among all infants born in the total birth population (3.3%). Approximately 20.7% (15,532 of 74,926) of ART-conceived infants were twins, and 0.6% (469 of 74,926) were triplets and higher-order multiples.

Nationally, infants conceived with ART contributed to 4.2% of all low birthweight (<2,500 g) infants. Among ART-conceived infants, 18.3% were low birthweight compared with 8.3% among all infants. ART-conceived infants contributed to 5.1% of all preterm (gestational age <37 weeks) infants. The percentage of preterm births was higher among infants conceived with ART (26.1%) than among all infants born in the total birth population (10.0%).

The percentage of low birthweight among singletons was 8.3% among ART-conceived infants and 6.6% among all infants born. The percentage of preterm births among ART-conceived singleton infants was 14.9% compared with 8.3% among all singleton infants. The percentages of small for gestational age infants was 7.3% among ART-conceived infants compared with 9.4% among all infants.

Interpretation

Although singleton infants accounted for the majority of ART-conceived infants, multiple births from ART varied substantially among states and nationally, contributing to >12% of all twins, triplets, and higher-order multiple infants born in the United States. Because multiple births are associated with higher rates of prematurity than singleton births, the contribution of ART to poor birth outcomes continues to be noteworthy. Although SET rates increased among all age groups, variations in SET rates among states and territories remained, which might reflect variations in embryo-transfer practices among fertility clinics and might in part account for variations in multiple birth rates among states and territories.

Public Health Action

Reducing the number of embryos transferred and increasing use of SET, when clinically appropriate, can help reduce multiple births and related adverse health consequences for both mothers and infants. Whereas risks to mothers from multiple-birth pregnancy include higher rates of caesarean delivery, gestational hypertension, and gestational diabetes, infants from multiple births are at increased risk for numerous adverse sequelae such as preterm birth, birth defects, and developmental disabilities. Long-term follow-up of ART infants through integration of existing maternal and infant health surveillance systems and registries with data available from NASS might be useful for monitoring adverse outcomes on a population basis.

Assisted Reproductive Technology Surveillance - United States, 2017

PROBLEM/CONDITION

Since the first U.S. infant conceived with assisted reproductive technology (ART) was born in 1981, both the use of ART and the number of fertility clinics providing ART services have increased steadily in the United States. ART includes fertility treatments in which eggs or embryos are handled in the laboratory (i.e., in vitro fertilization [IVF] and related procedures). Although the majority of infants conceived through ART are singletons, women who undergo ART procedures are more likely than women who conceive naturally to have multiple-birth infants because multiple embryos may be transferred. Multiple births can pose substantial risks for both mothers and infants, including obstetric complications, preterm birth (<37 weeks), and low birthweight (<2,500 g). This report provides state-specific information for the United States (including the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico) on ART procedures performed in 2017 and compares birth outcomes that occurred in 2017 (resulting from ART procedures performed in 2016 and 2017) with outcomes for all infants born in the United States in 2017.

PERIOD COVERED

2017.

DESCRIPTION OF SYSTEM

In 1995, CDC began collecting data on ART procedures performed in fertility clinics in the United States as mandated by the Fertility Clinic Success Rate and Certification Act of 1992 (Public Law 102-493 [October 24, 1992]). Data are collected through the National ART Surveillance System (NASS), a web-based data collection system developed by CDC. This report includes data from the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico.

RESULTS

In 2017, a total of 196,454 ART procedures (range: 162 in Alaska to 24,179 in California) with at least one embryo transferred were performed in 448 U.S. fertility clinics and reported to CDC. These procedures resulted in 68,908 live-birth deliveries (range: 67 in Puerto Rico to 8,852 in California) and 78,052 infants born (range: 85 in Puerto Rico to 9,926 in California). Nationally, the number of ART procedures performed per 1 million women of reproductive age (15-44 years) was 3,040. ART use rates exceeded the national rate in 14 states (Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont, and Virginia). ART use exceeded 1.5 times the national rate in seven states (Connecticut, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York). Nationally, among all ART transfer procedures, the average number of embryos transferred increased slightly with increasing age (1.3 among women aged <35 years, 1.4 among women aged 35-37 years, and 1.5 among women aged >37 years). This year, single-embryo transfer (SET) rates among all embryo-transfer procedures are presented instead of elective single-embryo transfer procedures previously reported. Nationally, SET rates were 67.3% (range: 38.9% in South Dakota to 90.4% in Delaware), 65.0% (range: 23.6% in Puerto Rico to 89.4% in Delaware), and 60.0% (range: 28.6% in Puerto Rico to 83.1% in Delaware) among women aged <35 years, aged 35-37 years, and aged >37 years, respectively. In 2017, ART contributed to 1.9% of all infants born in the United States (range: 0.4% in Puerto Rico to 5.0% in Massachusetts). Approximately 73.6% of ART-conceived infants were singleton infants. Overall, ART contributed to 14.7% of all multiple births, including 14.7% of all twin infants and 17.3% of all triplets and higher-order infants. ART-conceived twins accounted for approximately 96.5% (18,890 of 19,570) of all ART-conceived infants born in multiple deliveries. The percentage of multiple births was higher among infants conceived with ART (26.4%) than among all infants born in the total birth population (3.4%). Approximately 25.5% of ART-conceived infants were twins, and 0.9% were triplets and higher-order infants. Nationally, infants conceived with ART contributed to 4.5% of all low birthweight (<2,500 g) infants. Among ART-conceived infants, 20.2% had low birthweight, compared with 8.3% among all infants. ART-conceived infants contributed to 5.3% of all preterm (gestational age <37 weeks) infants. The percentage of preterm births was higher among infants conceived with ART (27.8%) than among all infants born in the total birth population (9.9%). The percentage of low birthweight among singletons was 8.1% among ART-conceived infants and 6.6% among all infants born. The percentage of preterm births among ART-conceived singleton infants was 14.0%, compared with 8.1% among all singleton infants. The percentages of small for gestational age infants was 7.6% among ART-conceived infants, compared with 9.9% among all infants.

INTERPRETATION

Although singleton infants accounted for the majority of ART-conceived infants, multiple births from ART still contributed to a substantial proportion of all twins, triplets, and higher-order infants born in the United States. Variations in SET rates among states and territories were noted, reflecting variations in embryo-transfer practices among fertility clinics, which might in part account for higher multiple birth from ART observed in some states and territories.

PUBLIC HEALTH ACTION

Reducing the number of embryos transferred and increasing use of SET, when clinically appropriate, can help reduce multiple births and related adverse health consequences for both mothers and infants. Because infants from multiple births are at increased risk for numerous adverse sequelae that cannot be ascertained from the data collected through NASS alone, long-term follow-up for ART infants through integration of existing maternal and infant health surveillance systems and registries with data available from NASS might be useful for monitoring adverse outcomes on a population basis.

Single or double embryo transfer? Decision-making process in patients participating in an oocyte donation program

In IVF/ICSI programs, after receiving the information about the success results of single embryo transfer (SET) vs double embryo transfer (DET) and the risks of multiple pregnancy, a significant number of patients opt for SET. Up to date, no comparable studies have been published in oocyte recipients. The aim of this study was to evaluate if the counseling provided to oocyte recipients influence their decision on the number of embryos to be transferred. Fifty-five recipients expressed their preference and the relevance for the decision-making process that they attribute to certain factors through an anonymous questionnaire completed pre and post-counseling. Before counseling, 32 out of 55 recipients preferred DET, 13 preferred SET and 10 were undecided. From the 32 recipients who preferred DET, 16 (50%) maintained their preference after counseling, 13 (40.6%) changed their decision to SET and 3 (9.4%) changed to undecided (McNemar's test: p < .05). After counseling, the patients attached less importance to the probability of pregnancy and more importance to maternal and perinatal risks (p < .05). We conclude that after counseling, a significant number of recipients changed their preferences from DET to SET.

Role of religion, spirituality, and faith in assisted reproduction

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of the patient's faith, religion, and spirituality on the outcomes of intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles. Materials and methods: Eight hundred and seventy-seven patients received a questionnaire containing information on faith, religiosity, and spirituality and the results of the questionnaires were correlated with ICSI outcomes. Patients stated to be Catholic (n = 476), spiritists (n = 93), Evangelical (n = 118), and other religion (n = 32), and 78 did not identify with any religious group. Results: A significant increase in fertilization, high-quality embryos, and pregnancy rate was found among Spiritists and Evangelicals. Patients who included the infertility diagnosis and treatment in their prayers showed an increased pregnancy rate, and those who reported their faith to be affected by the infertility diagnosis presented a decreased high-quality embryos rate. The high-quality embryos rate was increased among patients who answered that their faith contributed to their decision to undergo infertility treatment. The cycle's cancelation was negatively correlated with the frequency of religious meetings, and the frequency of prayers was positively correlated with the response to ovarian stimulation. Finally, belief in treatment success positively influenced the embryo quality. Conclusion: The findings suggest that spirituality plays a role in adjusting the psychological aspects of an infertile patient.

Assisted Reproductive Technology Surveillance - United States, 2016

PROBLEM/CONDITION

Since the first U.S. infant conceived with assisted reproductive technology (ART) was born in 1981, both the use of ART and the number of fertility clinics providing ART services have increased steadily in the United States. ART includes fertility treatments in which eggs or embryos are handled in the laboratory (i.e., in vitro fertilization [IVF] and related procedures). Although the majority of infants conceived through ART are singletons, women who undergo ART procedures are more likely than women who conceive naturally to deliver multiple-birth infants. Multiple births pose substantial risks for both mothers and infants, including obstetric complications, preterm delivery (<37 weeks), and low birthweight (<2,500 g). This report provides state-specific information for the United States (including the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico) on ART procedures performed in 2016 and compares birth outcomes that occurred in 2016 (resulting from ART procedures performed in 2015 and 2016) with outcomes for all infants born in the United States in 2016.

PERIOD COVERED

2016.

DESCRIPTION OF SYSTEM

In 1995, CDC began collecting data on ART procedures performed in fertility clinics in the United States as mandated by the Fertility Clinic Success Rate and Certification Act of 1992 (FCSRCA) (Public Law 102-493 [October 24, 1992]). Data are collected through the National ART Surveillance System (NASS), a web-based data collection system developed by CDC. This report includes data from 52 reporting areas (the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico).

RESULTS

In 2016, a total of 197,706 ART procedures (range: 162 in Wyoming to 24,030 in California) with the intent to transfer at least one embryo were performed in 463 U.S. fertility clinics and reported to CDC. These procedures resulted in 65,964 live-birth deliveries (range: 57 in Puerto Rico to 8,638 in California) and 76,892 infants born (range: 74 in Alaska to 9,885 in California). Nationally, the number of ART procedures performed per 1 million women of reproductive age (15-44 years), a proxy measure of the ART use rate, was 3,075. ART use rates exceeded the national rate in 14 reporting areas (Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Utah, and Virginia). ART use exceeded 1.5 times the national rate in nine states, including three (Illinois, Massachusetts, and New Jersey) that also had comprehensive mandated health insurance coverage for ART procedures (i.e., coverage for at least four oocyte retrievals). Nationally, among ART transfer procedures for patients using fresh embryos from their own eggs, the average number of embryos transferred increased with increasing age (1.5 among women aged <35 years, 1.7 among women aged 35-37 years, and 2.2 among women aged >37 years). Among women aged <35 years, the national elective single-embryo transfer (eSET) rate was 42.7% (range: 8.3% in North Dakota to 83.9% in Delaware). In 2016, ART contributed to 1.8% of all infants born in the United States (range: 0.3% in Puerto Rico to 4.7% in Massachusetts). ART also contributed to 16.4% of all multiple-birth infants, including 16.2% of all twin infants and 19.4% of all triplets and higher-order infants. ART-conceived twins accounted for approximately 96.5% (21,455 of 22,233) of all ART-conceived infants born in multiple deliveries. The percentage of multiple-birth infants was higher among infants conceived with ART (31.5%) than among all infants born in the total birth population (3.4%). Approximately 30.4% of ART-conceived infants were twins and 1.1% were triplets and higher-order infants. Nationally, infants conceived with ART contributed to 5.0% of all low birthweight (<2,500 g) infants. Among ART-conceived infants, 23.6% had low birthweight compared with 8.2% among all infants. ART-conceived infants contributed to 5.3% of all preterm (gestational age <37 weeks) infants. The percentage of preterm births was higher among infants conceived with ART (29.9%) than among all infants born in the total birth population (9.9%). The percentage of ART-conceived infants who had low birthweight was 8.7% among singletons, 54.9% among twins, and 94.9% among triplets and higher-order multiples; the corresponding percentages among all infants born were 6.2% among singletons, 55.4% among twins, and 94.6% among triplets and higher-order multiples. The percentage of ART-conceived infants who were born preterm was 13.7% among singletons, 64.2% among twins, and 97.0% among triplets and higher-order infants; the corresponding percentages among all infants were 7.8% for singletons, 59.9% for twins, and 97.7% for triplets and higher-order infants.

INTERPRETATION

Multiple births from ART contributed to a substantial proportion of all twins, triplets, and higher-order infants born in the United States. For women aged <35 years, who typically are considered good candidates for eSET, on average, 1.5 embryos were transferred per ART procedure, resulting in higher multiple birth rates than could be achieved with single-embryo transfers. Of the four states (Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Rhode Island) with comprehensive mandated health insurance coverage, three (Illinois, Massachusetts, and New Jersey) had rates of ART use >1.5 times the national average. Although other factors might influence ART use, insurance coverage for infertility treatments accounts for some of the difference in per capita ART use observed among states because most states do not mandate any coverage for ART treatment.

PUBLIC HEALTH ACTION

Twins account for almost all of ART-conceived multiple births born in multiple deliveries. Reducing the number of embryos transferred and increasing use of eSET, when clinically appropriate, could help reduce multiple births and related adverse health consequences for both mothers and infants. Because multiple-birth infants are at increased risk for numerous adverse sequelae that cannot be ascertained from the data collected through NASS alone, long-term follow-up of ART infants through integration of existing maternal and infant health surveillance systems and registries with data available from NASS might be useful for monitoring adverse outcomes.

Effects of patient education on desire for twins and use of elective single embryo transfer procedures during ART treatment: A systematic review

Twin births among users of assisted reproductive technology (ART) pose serious risks to both mothers and infants. However, patients may prefer twins and may be unaware of the risks of twin pregnancies. Increasing use of elective single embryo transfers (eSET) through improved patient education could help to reduce twin births and related adverse health consequences. A systematic review of PUBMED and EMBASE databases was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of patient education among ART users on knowledge of twin pregnancy risks, desire for twins, preference for or use of eSET, and twin pregnancy rates. Of 187 references retrieved, six met the selection criteria. Most focused on patients undergoing their first ART cycle aged < 35 years. Patient education was delivered via written materials, DVDs or discussion. Four studies reporting on knowledge of risks or desire for twins showed significant effects of oral and written descriptions of multiple pregnancy complications, risks of twins versus singletons, and DVDs with factual information. Five studies showed increased eSET use or preference after patients were educated on the risks of multiple pregnancy and success rates associated with different types of ART procedures, when combined with clinic policies that supported single blastocyst transfers or provided options for insurance. In younger ART users, patient education on twin pregnancy risks and success rates of eSET may improve knowledge of twin pregnancy risks and increase use of eSET, and may be important for wider implementation of eSET in countries such as the USA where the use of eSET remains low. Clinic policies of single blastocyst transfers or financial incentives may strengthen these effects.

Providing Japanese health care information for international visitors: digital animation intervention

Background

Over 24 million international visitors came to Japan in 2016 and the number is expected to increase. Visitors could be at a risk of illness or injury that may result in hospitalization in Japan. We assessed the effects of a four-minute digital animation titled Mari Info Japan on the level of anxiety experienced by international visitors to Japan.

Methods

We conducted a non-randomized, controlled study at Narita International Airport outside Tokyo in December 2014. On the first day, we recruited international visitors for the intervention group at predetermined departure gates and, the following day, we sampled visitors for the control group at the same gates. We repeated this procedure twice over 4 days. The intervention group watched the digital animation and the control group read a standard travel guidebook in English. After receiving either intervention, they completed a questionnaire on their level of anxiety. The outcome was assessed using the Mari Meter-X, The State-Trait Anxiety Inventory Form Y (STAI-Y), and a face scale, before and immediately after the intervention. We analyzed data with Wilcoxon rank sum tests.

Results

We recruited 265 international visitors (134 in the intervention group, 131 in the control group), 241 (91%) of whom completed the questionnaire. Most of them had no previous Japanese health information before arrival in Japan. The level of anxiety about health services in Japan was significantly reduced in the intervention group (Mari Meter-X median: − 5 and 0, p < 0.001 and STAI-Y median: − 3 and 0, p < 0.001). The face scale analysis showed no significant difference.

Conclusions

Watching a digital animation is more effective in reducing anxiety among international visitors to Japan compared with reading a standard brochure or guidebook. Such effective animations of health information should be more widely distributed to international visitors.

Trial registration

UMIN-CTR (University Hospital Medical Information Network Center Clinical Trials Registry), UMIN000015023, September 3, 2014.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-018-3191-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Video-based patient decision aids: A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

This study reviews the published literature on the use of video-based decision aids (DA) for patients. The authors describe the areas of medicine in which video-based patient DA have been evaluated, the medical decisions targeted, their reported impact, in which countries studies are being conducted, and publication trends.

METHOD

The literature review was conducted systematically using Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsychInfo, and Pubmed databases from inception to 2016. References of identified studies were reviewed, and hand-searches of relevant journals were conducted.

RESULTS

488 studies were included and organized based on predefined study characteristics. The most common decisions addressed were cancer screening, risk reduction, advance care planning, and adherence to provider recommendations. Most studies had sample sizes of fewer than 300, and most were performed in the United States. Outcomes were generally reported as positive. This field of study was relatively unknown before 1990s but the number of studies published annually continues to increase.

CONCLUSION

Videos are largely positive interventions but there are significant remaining knowledge gaps including generalizability across populations.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Clinicians should consider incorporating video-based DA in their patient interactions. Future research should focus on less studied areas and the mechanisms underlying effective patient decision aids.

Assisted Reproductive Technology Surveillance - United States, 2015

PROBLEM/CONDITION

Since the first U.S. infant conceived with assisted reproductive technology (ART) was born in 1981, both the use of ART and the number of fertility clinics providing ART services have increased steadily in the United States. ART includes fertility treatments in which eggs or embryos are handled in the laboratory (i.e., in vitro fertilization [IVF] and related procedures). Although the majority of infants conceived through ART are singletons, women who undergo ART procedures are more likely than women who conceive naturally to deliver multiple-birth infants. Multiple births pose substantial risks for both mothers and infants, including obstetric complications, preterm delivery (<37 weeks), and low birthweight (<2,500 g) infants. This report provides state-specific information for the United States (including the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico) on ART procedures performed in 2015 and compares birth outcomes that occurred in 2015 (resulting from ART procedures performed in 2014 and 2015) with outcomes for all infants born in the United States in 2015.

PERIOD COVERED

2015.

DESCRIPTION OF SYSTEM

In 1995, CDC began collecting data on ART procedures performed in fertility clinics in the United States as mandated by the Fertility Clinic Success Rate and Certification Act of 1992 (FCSRCA) (Public Law 102-493 [October 24, 1992]). Data are collected through the National ART Surveillance System, a web-based data collection system developed by CDC. This report includes data from 52 reporting areas (the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico).

RESULTS

In 2015, a total of 182,111 ART procedures (range: 135 in Alaska to 23,198 in California) with the intent to transfer at least one embryo were performed in 464 U.S. fertility clinics and reported to CDC. These procedures resulted in 59,334 live-birth deliveries (range: 55 in Wyoming to 7,802 in California) and 71,152 infants born (range: 68 in Wyoming to 9,176 in California). Nationally, the number of ART procedures performed per 1 million women of reproductive age (15-44 years), a proxy measure of the ART utilization rate, was 2,832. ART use exceeded the national rate in 13 reporting areas (California, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, and Virginia). Nationally, among ART transfer procedures in patients using fresh embryos from their own eggs, the average number of embryos transferred increased with increasing age of the woman (1.6 among women aged <35 years, 1.8 among women aged 35-37 years, and 2.3 among women aged >37 years). Among women aged <35 years, the national elective single-embryo transfer (eSET) rate was 34.7% (range: 11.3% in Puerto Rico to 88.1% in Delaware). In 2015, ART contributed to 1.7% of all infants born in the United States (range: 0.3% in Puerto Rico to 4.5% in Massachusetts). ART also contributed to 17.0% of all multiple-birth infants, 16.8% of all twin infants, and 22.2% of all triplets and higher-order infants. The percentage of multiple-birth infants was higher among infants conceived with ART (35.3%) than among all infants born in the total birth population (3.4%). Approximately 34.0% of ART-conceived infants were twins and 1.0% were triplets and higher-order infants. Nationally, infants conceived with ART contributed to 5.1% of all low birthweight infants. Among ART-conceived infants, 25.5% had low birthweight, compared with 8.1% among all infants. ART-conceived infants contributed to 5.3% of all preterm (gestational age <37 weeks) infants. The percentage of preterm births was higher among infants conceived with ART (31.2%) than among all infants born in the total birth population (9.7%). Among singletons, the percentage of ART-conceived infants who had low birthweight was 8.7% compared with 6.4% among all infants born. The percentage of ART-conceived infants who were born preterm was 13.4% among singletons compared with 7.9% among all infants.

INTERPRETATION

Multiple births from ART contributed to a substantial proportion of all twins, triplets, and higher-order infants born in the United States. For women aged <35 years, who are typically considered good candidates for eSET, the national average of 1.6 embryos was transferred per ART procedure. Of the four states (Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Rhode Island) with comprehensive mandated health insurance coverage for ART procedures (i.e., coverage for at least four cycles of IVF), three (Illinois, Massachusetts, and New Jersey) had rates of ART use exceeding 1.5 times the national rate. This type of mandated insurance coverage has been associated with greater use of ART and likely accounts for some of the difference in per capita ART use observed among states.

PUBLIC HEALTH ACTION

Twins account for the majority of ART-conceived multiple births. Reducing the number of embryos transferred and increasing use of eSET when clinically appropriate could help reduce multiple births and related adverse health consequences for both mothers and infants. State-based surveillance of ART might be useful for monitoring and evaluating maternal and infant health outcomes of ART in states with high ART use.

Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions

BACKGROUND

Decision aids are interventions that support patients by making their decisions explicit, providing information about options and associated benefits/harms, and helping clarify congruence between decisions and personal values.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of decision aids in people facing treatment or screening decisions.

SEARCH METHODS

Updated search (2012 to April 2015) in CENTRAL; MEDLINE; Embase; PsycINFO; and grey literature; includes CINAHL to September 2008.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included published randomized controlled trials comparing decision aids to usual care and/or alternative interventions. For this update, we excluded studies comparing detailed versus simple decision aids.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently screened citations for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Primary outcomes, based on the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS), were attributes related to the choice made and the decision-making process.Secondary outcomes were behavioural, health, and health system effects.We pooled results using mean differences (MDs) and risk ratios (RRs), applying a random-effects model. We conducted a subgroup analysis of studies that used the patient decision aid to prepare for the consultation and of those that used it in the consultation. We used GRADE to assess the strength of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 105 studies involving 31,043 participants. This update added 18 studies and removed 28 previously included studies comparing detailed versus simple decision aids. During the 'Risk of bias' assessment, we rated two items (selective reporting and blinding of participants/personnel) as mostly unclear due to inadequate reporting. Twelve of 105 studies were at high risk of bias.With regard to the attributes of the choice made, decision aids increased participants' knowledge (MD 13.27/100; 95% confidence interval (CI) 11.32 to 15.23; 52 studies; N = 13,316; high-quality evidence), accuracy of risk perceptions (RR 2.10; 95% CI 1.66 to 2.66; 17 studies; N = 5096; moderate-quality evidence), and congruency between informed values and care choices (RR 2.06; 95% CI 1.46 to 2.91; 10 studies; N = 4626; low-quality evidence) compared to usual care.Regarding attributes related to the decision-making process and compared to usual care, decision aids decreased decisional conflict related to feeling uninformed (MD -9.28/100; 95% CI -12.20 to -6.36; 27 studies; N = 5707; high-quality evidence), indecision about personal values (MD -8.81/100; 95% CI -11.99 to -5.63; 23 studies; N = 5068; high-quality evidence), and the proportion of people who were passive in decision making (RR 0.68; 95% CI 0.55 to 0.83; 16 studies; N = 3180; moderate-quality evidence).Decision aids reduced the proportion of undecided participants and appeared to have a positive effect on patient-clinician communication. Moreover, those exposed to a decision aid were either equally or more satisfied with their decision, the decision-making process, and/or the preparation for decision making compared to usual care.Decision aids also reduced the number of people choosing major elective invasive surgery in favour of more conservative options (RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.75 to 1.00; 18 studies; N = 3844), but this reduction reached statistical significance only after removing the study on prophylactic mastectomy for breast cancer gene carriers (RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.73 to 0.97; 17 studies; N = 3108). Compared to usual care, decision aids reduced the number of people choosing prostate-specific antigen screening (RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.80 to 0.98; 10 studies; N = 3996) and increased those choosing to start new medications for diabetes (RR 1.65; 95% CI 1.06 to 2.56; 4 studies; N = 447). For other testing and screening choices, mostly there were no differences between decision aids and usual care.The median effect of decision aids on length of consultation was 2.6 minutes longer (24 versus 21; 7.5% increase). The costs of the decision aid group were lower in two studies and similar to usual care in four studies. People receiving decision aids do not appear to differ from those receiving usual care in terms of anxiety, general health outcomes, and condition-specific health outcomes. Studies did not report adverse events associated with the use of decision aids.In subgroup analysis, we compared results for decision aids used in preparation for the consultation versus during the consultation, finding similar improvements in pooled analysis for knowledge and accurate risk perception. For other outcomes, we could not conduct formal subgroup analyses because there were too few studies in each subgroup.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared to usual care across a wide variety of decision contexts, people exposed to decision aids feel more knowledgeable, better informed, and clearer about their values, and they probably have a more active role in decision making and more accurate risk perceptions. There is growing evidence that decision aids may improve values-congruent choices. There are no adverse effects on health outcomes or satisfaction. New for this updated is evidence indicating improved knowledge and accurate risk perceptions when decision aids are used either within or in preparation for the consultation. Further research is needed on the effects on adherence with the chosen option, cost-effectiveness, and use with lower literacy populations.

Elective single versus double embryo transfer: live birth outcome and patient acceptance in a prospective randomised trial

The purpose of this study was to determine which strategy of embryo transfer has a better trade-off in live birth delivery rate versus multiple pregnancy considering patient acceptance: elective single embryo transfer (eSET) or elective double embryo transfer (eDET). In all, 199 women <38 years of age undergoing their first IVF treatment in a private centre were included in a prospective open-label randomised controlled trial. Patients were randomised into four groups: (1) eSET on Day 3; (2) eSET on Day 5; (3) eDET on Day 3; and (4) eDET on Day 5. Per patient, main analysis included acceptance of assigned group, as well as multiple and live birth delivery rates of the fresh cycle. Secondary analysis included the rates of subsequent cryotransfers and the theoretical cumulative success rate. Of 98 patients selected for eSET, 40% refused and preferred eDET. The live birth delivery rate after eDET was significantly higher after eDET versus eSET (65% vs 42%, respectively; odds ratio=1.6, 95% confidence interval 1.1-2.1). No multiple births were observed after eSET, compared with 35% after eDET. Although live birth delivery is higher with eDET, the increased risk of multiple births is avoided with eSET. Nearly half the patients refused eSET even after having been well informed about its benefits.

Assisted Reproductive Technology Surveillance - United States, 2014

PROBLEM/CONDITION

Since the first U.S. infant conceived with assisted reproductive technology (ART) was born in 1981, both the use of ART and the number of fertility clinics providing ART services have increased steadily in the United States. ART includes fertility treatments in which eggs or embryos are handled in the laboratory (i.e., in vitro fertilization [IVF] and related procedures). Women who undergo ART procedures are more likely than women who conceive naturally to deliver multiple-birth infants. Multiple births pose substantial risks to both mothers and infants, including obstetric complications, preterm delivery, and low birthweight infants. This report provides state-specific information for the United States (including the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico) on ART procedures performed in 2014 and compares birth outcomes that occurred in 2014 (resulting from ART procedures performed in 2013 and 2014) with outcomes for all infants born in the United States in 2014.

PERIOD COVERED

2014.

DESCRIPTION OF SYSTEM

In 1996, CDC began collecting data on ART procedures performed in fertility clinics in the United States as mandated by the Fertility Clinic Success Rate and Certification Act of 1992 (FCSRCA) (Public Law 102-493). Data are collected through the National ART Surveillance System (NASS), a web-based data collection system developed by CDC. This report includes data from 52 reporting areas (the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico).

RESULTS

In 2014, a total of 169,568 ART procedures (range: 124 in Wyoming to 21,018 in California) with the intent to transfer at least one embryo were performed in 458 U.S. fertility clinics and reported to CDC. These procedures resulted in 56,028 live-birth deliveries (range: 52 in Wyoming to 7,230 in California) and 68,782 infants born (range: 64 in Wyoming to 8,793 in California). Nationally, the total number of ART procedures performed per million women of reproductive age (15-44 years), a proxy measure of the ART usage rate, was 2,647 (range: 364 in Puerto Rico to 6,726 in Massachusetts). ART use exceeded the national average in 13 reporting areas (Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Virginia). Eight reporting areas (Connecticut, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York) had rates of ART use exceeding 1.5 times the national average. Nationally, among ART transfer procedures in patients using fresh embryos from their own eggs, the average number of embryos transferred increased with increasing age of the woman (1.7 among women aged <35 years, 1.9 among women aged 35-37 years, and 2.3 among women aged >37 years). Among women aged <35 years, who typically are considered to be good candidates for elective single embryo transfer (eSET) procedures, the national eSET rate was 28.5% (range: 4.3% in Puerto Rico to 67.9% in Delaware). In 2014, ART contributed to 1.6% of all infants born in the United States (range: 0.4% in Puerto Rico to 4.7% in Massachusetts) and 18.3% of all multiple-birth infants (range: 5.5% in Alaska and West Virginia to 37.3% in Hawaii), including 18.0% of all twin infants (range: 5.2% in some states to 36.2% in Hawaii) and 26.4% of all triplets and higher-order infants (range: 0% in some states to 65.2% in Hawaii). Percentages of live births that were multiple-birth deliveries were higher among infants conceived with ART (39.4%; range: 11.5% in Delaware to 55.6% in Puerto Rico) than among all infants born in the total birth population (3.5%; range: 2.2% in Puerto Rico to 4.4% in New Jersey). Approximately 38.0% of ART-conceived infants were twin infants, and 2.0% were triplets and higher-order infants. ART-conceived twins accounted for approximately 95.3% of all ART-conceived infants born in multiple deliveries. Nationally, infants conceived with ART contributed to 5.5% of all low birthweight (<2,500 g) infants (range: 1.2% in West Virginia to 14.2% in Massachusetts). Among ART-conceived infants, 27.8% were low birthweight (range: 10.6% in Delaware to 44.4% in Puerto Rico), compared with 8.0% among all infants (range: 5.9% in Alaska to 11.3% in Mississippi). ART-conceived infants contributed to 4.7% of all preterm (<37 weeks) infants (range: 1.2% in Puerto Rico to 13.4% in Massachusetts). Percentages of preterm births were higher among infants conceived with ART (33.2%; range: 18.9% in the District of Columbia to 45.9% in Puerto Rico) than among all infants born in the total birth population (11.3%; range: 8.5% in California to 16.0% in Mississippi). The percentage of ART-conceived infants who were low birthweight was 8.9% (range: 3.2% in some states to 16.1% in Vermont) among singletons and 55.2% (range: 38.5% in Delaware to 77.8% in Alaska) among twins; the corresponding percentages of low birthweight infants among all infants born were 6.3% for singletons (range: 4.6% in Alaska, North Dakota, and Oregon to 9.5% in Puerto Rico) and 55.2% for twins (range: 46.1% in Alaska to 65.6% in Mississippi). The percentage of ART-conceived infants who were preterm was 13.2% (range: 7.5% in Rhode Island to 23.4% in West Virginia) among singletons and 62.2% (range: 33.3% in some states to 81.4% in Mississippi) among twins; the corresponding percentages of preterm infants among all infants were 9.7% for singletons (range: 1.7% in the District of Columbia to 14.2% in Mississippi) and 56.6% for twins (range: 47.2% in Vermont to 66.9% in Wyoming).

INTERPRETATION

The percentage of infants conceived with ART varied considerably by reporting area. Multiple births from ART contributed to a substantial proportion of all twins, triplets, and higher-order infants born. Low birthweight and preterm infant birth rates were disproportionately higher among ART-conceived infants than among the overall birth population. Although women aged <35 years are typically considered good candidates for eSET, on average two embryos were transferred per ART procedure with women in this group. Compared with ART-conceived singletons, ART-conceived twins were approximately five times more likely to be born preterm and approximately six times more likely to be born with low birthweight. Singleton infants conceived with ART had higher percentages of preterm birth and low birthweight than all singleton infants born in the United States. ART use per population unit was geographically variable, with 13 reporting areas showing ART use higher than the national rate. Of the four states (Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Rhode Island) with comprehensive statewide-mandated health insurance coverage for ART procedures (i.e., coverage for at least four cycles of IVF), three (Illinois, Massachusetts, and New Jersey) had rates of ART use exceeding 1.5 times the national rate. This type of mandated insurance has been associated with greater use of ART and likely accounts for some of the difference in per capita ART use observed among states.

PUBLIC HEALTH ACTION

Reducing the number of embryos transferred and increasing use of eSET when clinically appropriate could help reduce multiple births and related adverse health consequences. Because twins account for the majority of ART-conceived multiple births, improved provider practices and patient education and counseling on the maternal and infant health risks of having twins are needed. Although ART contributes to high percentages of multiple births, other factors not investigated in this report (e.g., delayed childbearing and use of non-ART fertility treatments) also contribute to multiple births and warrant further study.

Deciding how many embryos to transfer: ongoing challenges and dilemmas

Despite the risks associated with twin and higher-order multiple births, and calls in many countries for single-embryo transfer as the standard of care for good-prognosis patients, providers frequently transfer additional embryos, raising critical questions as to why this is the case and what can be done about it. In-depth interviews of approximately 1 h each were conducted with 27 IVF providers (17 physicians and 10 other healthcare providers) and 10 patients. Professional guidelines often contain flexibility and ambiguities or are unenforced. Thus, both providers and patients frequently wrestle with several dilemmas. Decisions about the number of embryos to transfer emerge as dyadic, dynamic and affected by several factors (e.g. providers' type of institution, and personal and professional experiences and perceptions of the data), leading to differences in whether, how and with what effectiveness clinicians address these issues with patients. Many clinicians feel that the evidence concerning the apparent increased risk associated with a twin birth is not 'compelling', and patients frequently minimize the hazards. These data, the first to explore several critical aspects of how providers and patients view and make decisions about the number of embryos to transfer, thus highlight tensions, uncertainties and challenges that providers and patients confront, and have key implications for future practice, research, policy and education.

Freeze-all embryo transfer awareness and acceptance of IVF-ET patients in China

The aim of the study was to determine the level of awareness and acceptance of in vitro fertilization pre-embryo transfer (IVF-ET) patients for freeze-all embryo transfer, improve relevant technical specifications, and optimize treatment results based on medical experience.Questionnaires were completed by women who received in vitro fertilization embryo transfer. A total of 377 valid samples were included into this study. Through focus group discussions and tablet assisted intercept interviews, we analyzed the basic situation, the awareness for frozen-all embryo transfer, and the need for frozen-all embryo transfer information for infertile patients.In this study, 60% of patients received IVF-ET for the first time, whereas the remaining patients received IVF-ET more than once. We investigated the current awareness and acceptance of IVF-ET patients for freeze-all embryo transfer quantificationally. Patients were grouped based on quantitative measurements, and the mainstream group of patients (72.7%) was precisely the patients who were worried and concerned of frozen-all embryo transfers. Although few of them could "rationally accept the comparative advantage of the technology," this group was vulnerable to doctors' guidance and education. Eventually, this group of patients accepted the frozen-all embryo transfer.Since there are no certain criteria for the kind of embryo transfer patients and reproductive centers should take, the choice should be taken individually according to the social economic situation and acceptance of patients for the frozen embryo transfer, as well as the technology of the reproductive center.

Promoting the use of elective single embryo transfer in clinical practice

Background

The transfer of multiple embryos after in vitro fertilization (IVF) increases the risk of twins and higher-order births. Multiple births are associated with significant health risks and maternal and neonatal complications, as well as physical, emotional, and financial stresses that can strain families and increase the incidence of depression and anxiety disorders in parents. Elective single embryo transfer (eSET) is among the most effective methods to reduce the risk of multiple births with IVF.

Main body

Current societal guidelines recommend eSET for patients <35 years of age with a good prognosis, yet even this approach is not widely applied. Many patients and clinicians have been reluctant to adopt eSET due to studies reporting higher live birth rates with the transfer of two or more embryos rather than eSET. Additional barriers to eSET include risk of treatment dropout after embryo transfer failure, patient preference for twins, a lack of knowledge about the risks and complications associated with multiple births, and the high costs of multiple IVF cycles. This review provides a comprehensive summary of strategies to increase the rate of eSET, including personalized counseling, access to educational information regarding the risks of multiple pregnancies and births, financial incentives, and tools to help predict the chances of IVF success. The use of comprehensive chromosomal screening to improve embryo selection has been shown to improve eSET outcomes and may increase acceptance of eSET.

Conclusions

eSET is an effective method for reducing multiple pregnancies resulting from IVF. Although several factors may impede the adoption of eSET, there are a number of strategies and tools that may encourage the more widespread adoption of eSET in clinical practice.

Psychological and educational interventions for subfertile men and women

BACKGROUND

Approximately one-fifth of all subfertile couples seeking fertility treatment show clinically relevant levels of anxiety, depression, or distress. Psychological and educational interventions are frequently offered to subfertile couples, but their effectiveness, both in improving mental health and pregnancy rates, is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of psychological and educational interventions for subfertile couples on psychological and fertility treatment outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched (from inception to 2 April 2015) the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register of Controlled Trials, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; Issue 2, 2015), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, EBSCO CINAHL, DARE, Web of Science, OpenGrey, LILACS, PubMed, and ongoing trials registers. We handsearched reference lists and contacted experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included published and unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster randomised trials, and cross-over trials (first phase) evaluating the effectiveness of psychological and educational interventions on psychological and fertility treatment outcomes in subfertile couples.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial risk of bias and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information. Our primary outcomes were psychological measures (anxiety and depression) and fertility rates (live birth or ongoing pregnancy). We assessed the overall quality of the evidence using GRADE criteria.As we did not consider the included studies to be sufficiently similar to permit meaningful pooling, we summarised the results of the individual studies by presenting the median and interquartile range (IQR) of effects as well as the minimum and maximum values. We calculated standardised mean differences (SMDs) for continuous variables and odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 39 studies involving 4925 participants undergoing assisted reproductive technology. Studies were heterogeneous with respect to a number of factors, including nature and duration of interventions, participants, and comparator groups. As a result, we judged that pooling results would not result in a clinically meaningful estimate of a treatment effect. There were substantial methodological weaknesses in the studies, all of which were judged to be at high risk of bias for one or more quality assessment domains. There was concern about attrition bias (24 studies), performance bias for psychological outcomes (27 studies) and fertility outcomes (18 studies), and detection bias for psychological outcomes (26 studies). We therefore considered study-specific estimates of intervention effects to be unreliable. Thirty-three studies reported the outcome mental health. Only two studies reported the outcome live birth, and both of these had substantial attrition. One study reported ongoing pregnancy, again with substantial attrition. We have combined live birth and ongoing pregnancy in one outcome. Psychological outcomesStudies utilised a variety of measures of anxiety and depression. In all cases a low score denoted benefit from the intervention.SMDs for anxiety were as follows: psychological interventions versus attentional control or usual care: median (IQR) = -0.30 (-0.84 to 0.00), minimum value -5.13; maximum value 0.84, 17 RCTs, 2042 participants; educational interventions versus attentional control or usual care: median = 0.03, minimum value -0.38; maximum value 0.23, 4 RCTs, 330 participants.SMDs for depression were as follows: psychological interventions versus attentional control or usual care: median (IQR) = -0.45 (-0.68 to -0.08), minimum value -3.01; maximum value 1.23, 12 RCTs, 1160 participants; educational interventions versus attentional control or usual care: median = -0.33, minimum value -0.46; maximum value 0.17, 3 RCTs, 304 participants. Fertility outcomesWhen psychological interventions were compared with attentional control or usual care, ORs for live birth or ongoing pregnancy ranged from minimum value 1.13 to maximum value 10.05. No studies of educational interventions reported this outcome.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The effects of psychological and educational interventions on mental health including distress, and live birth or ongoing pregnancy rates is uncertain due to the very low quality of the evidence. Existing trials of psychological and educational interventions for subfertility were generally poorly designed and executed, resulting in very serious risk of bias and serious inconsistency in study findings. There is a need for studies employing appropriate methodological techniques to investigate the benefits of these treatments for this population. In particular, attentional control groups should be employed, that is groups receiving a treatment that mimics the amount of time and attention received by the treatment group but is not thought to have a specific effect upon the participants, in order to distinguish between therapeutic and non-specific effects of interventions. Where attrition cannot be minimised, appropriate statistical techniques for handling drop-out must be applied. Failure to address these issues in study design has resulted in studies that do not provide a valid basis for answering questions about the effectiveness of these interventions.

Assisted Reproductive Technology Surveillance - United States, 2013

PROBLEM/CONDITION

Since the first U.S. infant conceived with assisted reproductive technology (ART) was born in 1981, both the use of ART and the number of fertility clinics providing ART services have increased steadily in the United States. ART includes fertility treatments in which eggs or embryos are handled in the laboratory (i.e., in vitro fertilization [IVF] and related procedures). Women who undergo ART procedures are more likely than women who conceive naturally to deliver multiple-birth infants. Multiple births pose substantial risks to both mothers and infants, including obstetric complications, preterm delivery, and low birthweight infants. This report provides state-specific information for the United States (including Puerto Rico) on ART procedures performed in 2013 and compares infant outcomes that occurred in 2013 (resulting from ART procedures performed in 2012 and 2013) with outcomes for all infants born in the United States in 2013.

REPORTING PERIOD COVERED

2013.

DESCRIPTION OF SYSTEM

In 1996, CDC began collecting data on ART procedures performed in fertility clinics in the United States as mandated by the Fertility Clinic Success Rate and Certification Act of 1992 (FCSRCA) (Public Law 102-493). Data are collected through the National ART Surveillance System (NASS), a web-based data collection system developed by CDC. This report includes data from 52 reporting areas (the 50 states, the District of Columbia [DC], and Puerto Rico).

RESULTS

In 2013, a total of 160,521 ART procedures (range: 109 in Wyoming to 20,299 in California) with the intent to transfer at least one embryo were performed in 467 U.S. fertility clinics and were reported to CDC. These procedures resulted in 53,252 live-birth deliveries (range: 47 in Alaska to 6,979 in California) and 66,691 infants (range: 61 in Alaska to 8,649 in California). Nationally, the total number of ART procedures performed per million women of reproductive age (15-44 years), a proxy measure of the ART usage rate, was 2,521 (range: 352 in Puerto Rico to 7,688 in DC). ART use exceeded the national rate in 13 reporting areas (California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Virginia, and DC). Nationally, among ART transfer procedures in patients using fresh embryos from their own eggs, the average number of embryos transferred increased with increasing age of the woman (1.8 among women aged <35 years, 2.0 among women aged 35-37 years, and 2.5 among women aged >37 years). Among women aged <35 years, who typically are considered to be good candidates for elective single embryo transfer (eSET) procedures, the national eSET rate was 21.4% (range: 4.0% in Idaho to 77.5% in Delaware). In 2013, ART contributed to 1.6% of all infants born in the United States (range: 0.2% in Puerto Rico to 4.8% in Massachusetts) and 18.7% of all multiple-birth infants (range: 4.5% in Puerto Rico to 35.7% in Massachusetts), including 18.5% of all twin infants (range: 4.5% in Mississippi to 35.3% in Massachusetts) and 25.2% of all triplet and higher-order infants (range: 0% in several reporting areas to 51.5% in New Jersey). Multiple-birth deliveries were higher among infants conceived with ART (41.1%; range: 20.4% in Delaware to 61.6% in Wyoming) than among all infants born in the total birth population (only 3.5%; range: 1.8% in Puerto Rico to 4.5% in Massachusetts and New Jersey). Approximately 39% of ART-conceived infants were twin infants, and 2% were triplet and higher-order infants. ART-conceived twins accounted for approximately 95.4% of all ART-conceived infants born in multiple deliveries. Nationally, infants conceived with ART contributed to 5.8% of all low birthweight (<2,500 grams) infants (range: 0.9% in Puerto Rico to 15.1% in Massachusetts). Among ART-conceived infants, 29.1% were low birthweight (range: 18.3% in Delaware to 42.6% in Louisiana), compared with 8.0% among all infants (range: 5.8% in Alaska to 11.5% in Mississippi). ART-conceived infants contributed to 4.6% of all preterm (<37 weeks) infants (range: 0.6% in Puerto Rico to 13.3% in Massachusetts). Preterm birth rates were higher among infants conceived with ART (33.6%; range: 22.3% in DC to 50.7% in Louisiana) than among all infants born in the total birth population (11.4%; range: 8.8% in California to 16.6% in Mississippi). The percentage of ART-conceived infants who were low birthweight was 9.0% (range: 5.1% in Mississippi to 19.7% in Puerto Rico) among singletons and 56.3% (range: 48.3% in Maine to 72.4% in Puerto Rico) among twins; the corresponding percentages among all infants born were 6.3% for singletons (range: 4.6% in Alaska to 9.6% in Mississippi and Puerto Rico) and 55.3% for twins (range: 43.6% in Alaska to 65.6% in Mississippi). The percentage of ART-conceived infants who were preterm varied from 13.3% (range: 8.7% in Rhode Island to 26.9% in West Virginia) among singletons to 61.0% (range: 47.8% in DC to 78.8% in Oklahoma) among twins; the corresponding percentages among all infants were 10.1% for singletons (range: 6.8% in Vermont to 14.8% in Mississippi) and 56.6% for twins (range: 44.7% in New Hampshire to 68.9% in Louisiana).

INTERPRETATION

The percentage of infants conceived with ART varied considerably by reporting area. In most reporting areas, multiple births from ART contributed to a substantial proportion of all twins, triplets, and higher-order infants born, and the low birthweight and preterm infant birth rates were disproportionately higher among ART-conceived infants than among the overall birth population. Although women aged <35 years are typically considered good candidates for eSET, on average two embryos were transferred per ART procedure with women in this group, increasing the overall multiple-birth rates in the United States. Compared with ART-conceived singletons, ART-conceived twins were approximately four-and-a-half times more likely to be born preterm, and approximately six times more likely to be born with low birthweight. Singleton infants conceived with ART had slightly higher rates of preterm delivery and low birthweight than all singleton infants born in the United States. ART use per population unit was geographically variable, with 13 reporting areas showing ART use above the national rate. Of the four states (Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Rhode Island) with comprehensive statewide-mandated health insurance coverage for ART procedures (i.e., coverage for at least four cycles of IVF), two states (Massachusetts and New Jersey) had rates of ART use exceeding twice the national level. This type of mandated insurance has been associated with greater use of ART and likely accounts for some of the difference in per capita ART use observed among states.

PUBLIC HEALTH ACTIONS

Reducing the number of embryos transferred per ART procedure and increasing use of eSET, when clinically appropriate (typically for women aged <35 years), could help reduce multiple births, particularly ART-conceived twin infants, and related adverse consequences of ART. Because twins account for the majority of ART-conceived multiple births, improved patient education and counseling on the maternal and infant health risks of having twins is needed. Although ART contributes to high rates of multiple births, other factors not investigated in this report (e.g., delayed childbearing and non-ART fertility treatments) also contribute to multiple births and warrant further study.

Is mandating elective single embryo transfer ethically justifiable in young women?

Compared with natural conception, IVF is an effective form of fertility treatment associated with higher rates of obstetric complications and poorer neonatal outcomes. While some increased risk is intrinsic to the infertile population requiring treatment, the practice of multiple embryo transfer contributes to these complications and outcomes, especially concerning its role in higher order pregnancies. As a result, several jurisdictions (e.g. Sweden, Belgium, Turkey, and Quebec) have legally mandated elective single-embryo transfer (eSET) for young women. We accept that in very high-risk scenarios (e.g. past history of preterm delivery and poor maternal health), double-embryo transfer (DET) should be prohibited due to unacceptably high risks. However, we argue that mandating eSET for all young women can be considered an unacceptable breach of patient autonomy, especially since DET offers certain women financial and social advantages. We also show that mandated eSET is inconsistent with other practices (e.g. ovulation induction and intrauterine insemination-ovulation induction) that can expose women and their offspring to risks associated with multiple pregnancies. While defending the option of DET for certain women, some recommendations are offered regarding IVF practice (e.g. preimplantation genetic screening and better support of IVF and maternity leave) to incentivise patients to choose eSET.

ESHRE guideline: routine psychosocial care in infertility and medically assisted reproduction-a guide for fertility staff

STUDY QUESTION

Based on the best available evidence in the literature, what is the optimal management of routine psychosocial care at infertility and medically assisted reproduction (MAR) clinics?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Using the structured methodology of the Manual for the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) Guideline Development, 120 recommendations were formulated that answered the 12 key questions on optimal management of routine psychosocial care by all fertility staff.

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN

The 2002 ESHRE Guidelines for counselling in infertility has been a reference point for best psychosocial care in infertility for years, but this guideline needed updating and did not focus on routine psychosocial care that can be delivered by all fertility staff.

STUDY, DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

This guideline was produced by a group of experts in the field according to the 12-step process described in the ESHRE Manual for Guideline Development. After scoping the guideline and listing a set of 12 key questions in PICO (Patient, Intervention, Comparison and Outcome) format, thorough systematic searches of the literature were conducted; evidence from papers published until April 2014 was collected, evaluated for quality and analysed. A summary of evidence was written in a reply to each of the key questions and used as the basis for recommendations, which were defined by consensus within the guideline development group (GDG). Patient and additional clinical input was collected during the scoping and the review phase of the guideline development.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

The guideline group, comprising psychologists, two medical doctors, a midwife, a patient representative and a methodological expert, met three times to discuss evidence and reach consensus on the recommendations.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE THE GUIDELINE PROVIDES

120 recommendations that aim at guiding fertility clinic staff in providing optimal evidence-based routine psychosocial care to patients dealing with infertility and MAR. The guideline is written in two sections. The first section describes patients' preferences regarding the psychosocial care they would like to receive at clinics and how this care is associated with their well-being. The second section of the guideline provides information about the psychosocial needs patients experience across their treatment pathway (before, during and after treatment) and how fertility clinic staff can detect and address these. Needs refer to conditions assumed necessary for patients to have a healthy experience of the fertility treatment. Needs can be behavioural (lifestyle, exercise, nutrition and compliance), relational (relationship with partner if there is one, family friends and larger network, and work), emotional (well-being, e.g. anxiety, depression and quality of life) and cognitive (treatment concerns and knowledge).

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

We identified many areas in care for which robust evidence was lacking. Gaps in evidence were addressed by formulating good practice points, based on the expert opinion of the GDG, but it is critical for such recommendations to be empirically validated.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

The evidence presented in this guideline shows that providing routine psychosocial care is associated with or has potential to reduce stress and concerns about medical procedures and improve lifestyle outcomes, fertility-related knowledge, patient well-being and compliance with treatment. As only 45 (36.0%) of the 125 recommendations were based on high-quality evidence, the guideline group formulated recommendations to guide future research with the aim of increasing the body of evidence.

Evolution of psychology and counseling in infertility

Five key paradigm shifts are described to illustrate the evolution of psychology and counseling in infertility. The first paradigm shift was in the 1930s when psychosomatic concepts were introduced in obstetrics and gynecology as causal factors to explain why some couples could not conceive despite the absence of organic pathology. In the second shift, the nurse advocacy movement of the 1970s stimulated the investigation of the psychosocial consequences of infertility and promoted counseling to help couples grieve childlessness when medical treatments often could not help them conceive. The third shift occurred with the advent of IVF, which created a demand for mental health professionals in fertility clinics. Mental health professionals assessed the ability of couples to withstand the demands of this new high technology treatment as well as their suitability as potential parents. The fourth shift, in the 1990s, saw reproductive medicine embrace the principles of evidence-based medicine, which introduced a much more rigorous approach to medical practice (effectiveness and safety) that extended to psychosocial interventions. The most recent paradigm shift, in the new millennium, occurred with the realization that compliance with protracted fertility treatment depended on the adoption of an integrated approach to fertility care. An integrated approach could reduce treatment burden arising from multiple sources (i.e., patient, clinic, and treatment). This review describes these paradigm shifts and reflects on future clinical and research directions for mental health professionals.

Use of a DVD to provide dietary and lifestyle information to pregnant women who are overweight or obese: a nested randomised trial

Background

We conducted a nested randomised trial to evaluate the effect of an educational DVD, providing information about healthy food choices and exercise during pregnancy, on diet and physical activity, among pregnant women who were overweight or obese.

Methods

We conducted a nested randomised trial within the context of the LIMIT randomised trial. Women were eligible with a singleton pregnancy between 10 and 20 weeks gestation, and body mass index at the time of their first antenatal appointment of ≥25 kg/m². All women who were randomised to the Lifestyle Advice Group of the LIMIT trial received a series of consultations with both research dieticians and research assistants, in addition to standard written dietary and exercise materials (Standard Materials Group). Women randomised to the DVD Group received the same consultations and written materials, and additionally received an educational DVD (DVD Group). The primary study outcome was the Healthy Eating Index. Other study outcomes included physical activity, and gestational weight gain. Women completed a qualitative evaluation of all the materials provided.

Results

1,108 women in the LIMIT Lifestyle Advice Group participated in the nested trial, with 543 women randomised to the DVD Group, and 565 women to the Standard Materials Group. Women who received the DVD compared with those who did not, had a higher mean Healthy Eating Index at 36 weeks gestation (73.6 vs 72.3; adjusted mean difference 1.2; 95% CI 0.2 to 2.3; p = 0.02), but not at 28 weeks gestation (73.2 vs 73.5; adjusted mean difference −0.1; 95% CI −1.1 to 0.9; p = 0.82). There were no statistically significant differences in physical activity or total gestational weight gain. While most women evaluated the materials positively, frequency of utilisation was poor.

Conclusions

Ongoing attention to the delivery of information is required, particularly with the increased use and availability of digital and multi-media interactive technologies.

Trial registration

Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12607000161426

Fresh versus frozen embryo transfer: backing clinical decisions with scientific and clinical evidence

BACKGROUND

Improvements in vitrification now make frozen embryo transfers (FETs) a viable alternative to fresh embryo transfer, with reports from observational studies and randomized controlled trials suggesting that: (i) the endometrium in stimulated cycles is not optimally prepared for implantation; (ii) pregnancy rates are increased following FET and (iii) perinatal outcomes are less affected after FET.

METHODS

This review integrates and discusses the available clinical and scientific evidence supporting embryo transfer in a natural cycle.

RESULTS

Laboratory-based studies demonstrate morphological and molecular changes to the endometrium and reduced responsiveness of the endometrium to hCG, resulting from controlled ovarian stimulation. The literature demonstrates reduced endometrial receptivity in controlled ovarian stimulation cycles and supports the clinical observations that FET reduces the risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome and improves outcomes for both the mother and baby.

CONCLUSIONS

This review provides the basis for an evidence-based approach towards changes in routine IVF, which may ultimately result in higher delivery rates of healthier term babies.

Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions

BACKGROUND

Decision aids are intended to help people participate in decisions that involve weighing the benefits and harms of treatment options often with scientific uncertainty.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of decision aids for people facing treatment or screening decisions.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched from 2009 to June 2012 in MEDLINE; CENTRAL; EMBASE; PsycINFO; and grey literature. Cumulatively, we have searched each database since its start date including CINAHL (to September 2008).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included published randomized controlled trials of decision aids, which are interventions designed to support patients' decision making by making explicit the decision, providing information about treatment or screening options and their associated outcomes, compared to usual care and/or alternative interventions. We excluded studies of participants making hypothetical decisions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened citations for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. The primary outcomes, based on the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS), were:A) 'choice made' attributes;B) 'decision-making process' attributes.Secondary outcomes were behavioral, health, and health-system effects. We pooled results using mean differences (MD) and relative risks (RR), applying a random-effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

This update includes 33 new studies for a total of 115 studies involving 34,444 participants. For risk of bias, selective outcome reporting and blinding of participants and personnel were mostly rated as unclear due to inadequate reporting. Based on 7 items, 8 of 115 studies had high risk of bias for 1 or 2 items each.Of 115 included studies, 88 (76.5%) used at least one of the IPDAS effectiveness criteria: A) 'choice made' attributes criteria: knowledge scores (76 studies); accurate risk perceptions (25 studies); and informed value-based choice (20 studies); and B) 'decision-making process' attributes criteria: feeling informed (34 studies) and feeling clear about values (29 studies).A) Criteria involving 'choice made' attributes:Compared to usual care, decision aids increased knowledge (MD 13.34 out of 100; 95% confidence interval (CI) 11.17 to 15.51; n = 42). When more detailed decision aids were compared to simple decision aids, the relative improvement in knowledge was significant (MD 5.52 out of 100; 95% CI 3.90 to 7.15; n = 19). Exposure to a decision aid with expressed probabilities resulted in a higher proportion of people with accurate risk perceptions (RR 1.82; 95% CI 1.52 to 2.16; n = 19). Exposure to a decision aid with explicit values clarification resulted in a higher proportion of patients choosing an option congruent with their values (RR 1.51; 95% CI 1.17 to 1.96; n = 13).B) Criteria involving 'decision-making process' attributes:Decision aids compared to usual care interventions resulted in:a) lower decisional conflict related to feeling uninformed (MD -7.26 of 100; 95% CI -9.73 to -4.78; n = 22) and feeling unclear about personal values (MD -6.09; 95% CI -8.50 to -3.67; n = 18);b) reduced proportions of people who were passive in decision making (RR 0.66; 95% CI 0.53 to 0.81; n = 14); andc) reduced proportions of people who remained undecided post-intervention (RR 0.59; 95% CI 0.47 to 0.72; n = 18).Decision aids appeared to have a positive effect on patient-practitioner communication in all nine studies that measured this outcome. For satisfaction with the decision (n = 20), decision-making process (n = 17), and/or preparation for decision making (n = 3), those exposed to a decision aid were either more satisfied, or there was no difference between the decision aid versus comparison interventions. No studies evaluated decision-making process attributes for helping patients to recognize that a decision needs to be made, or understanding that values affect the choice.C) Secondary outcomes Exposure to decision aids compared to usual care reduced the number of people of choosing major elective invasive surgery in favour of more conservative options (RR 0.79; 95% CI 0.68 to 0.93; n = 15). Exposure to decision aids compared to usual care reduced the number of people choosing to have prostate-specific antigen screening (RR 0.87; 95% CI 0.77 to 0.98; n = 9). When detailed compared to simple decision aids were used, fewer people chose menopausal hormone therapy (RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.55 to 0.98; n = 3). For other decisions, the effect on choices was variable.The effect of decision aids on length of consultation varied from 8 minutes shorter to 23 minutes longer (median 2.55 minutes longer) with 2 studies indicating statistically-significantly longer, 1 study shorter, and 6 studies reporting no difference in consultation length. Groups of patients receiving decision aids do not appear to differ from comparison groups in terms of anxiety (n = 30), general health outcomes (n = 11), and condition-specific health outcomes (n = 11). The effects of decision aids on other outcomes (adherence to the decision, costs/resource use) were inconclusive.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is high-quality evidence that decision aids compared to usual care improve people's knowledge regarding options, and reduce their decisional conflict related to feeling uninformed and unclear about their personal values. There is moderate-quality evidence that decision aids compared to usual care stimulate people to take a more active role in decision making, and improve accurate risk perceptions when probabilities are included in decision aids, compared to not being included. There is low-quality evidence that decision aids improve congruence between the chosen option and the patient's values.New for this updated review is further evidence indicating more informed, values-based choices, and improved patient-practitioner communication. There is a variable effect of decision aids on length of consultation. Consistent with findings from the previous review, decision aids have a variable effect on choices. They reduce the number of people choosing discretionary surgery and have no apparent adverse effects on health outcomes or satisfaction. The effects on adherence with the chosen option, cost-effectiveness, use with lower literacy populations, and level of detail needed in decision aids need further evaluation. Little is known about the degree of detail that decision aids need in order to have a positive effect on attributes of the choice made, or the decision-making process.

Refuting a misguided campaign against the goal of single-embryo transfer and singleton birth in assisted reproduction

Much recent progress has been made by assisted reproductive technology (ART) professionals toward minimizing the incidence of multiple pregnancy following ART treatment. While a healthy singleton birth is widely considered to be the ideal outcome of such treatment, a vocal minority continues a campaign to advocate the benefits of multiple embryo transfer as treatment and twin pregnancy as outcome for most ART patients. Proponents of twinning argue four points: that patients prefer twins, that multiple embryo transfer maximizes success rates, that the costs per infant are lower with twins and that one twin pregnancy and birth is associated with no higher risk than two consecutive singleton pregnancies and births. We find fault with the reasoning and data behind each of these tenets. First, we respect the principle of patient autonomy to choose the number of embryos for transfer but counter that it has been shown that better patient education reduces their desire for twins. In addition, reasonable and evidentially supported limits may be placed on autonomy in exchange for public or private insurance coverage for ART treatment, and counterbalancing ethical principles to autonomy exist, especially beneficence (doing good) and non-maleficence (doing no harm). Second, comparisons between success rates following single-embryo transfer (SET) and double-embryo transfers favor double-embryo transfers only when embryo utilization is not comparable; cumulative pregnancy and birth rates that take into account utilization of cryopreserved embryos (and the additional cryopreserved embryo available with single fresh embryo transfer) consistently demonstrate no advantage to double-embryo transfer. Third, while comparisons of costs are system dependent and not easy to assess, several independent studies all suggest that short-term costs per child (through the neonatal period alone) are lower with transfers of one rather than two embryos. And, finally, abundant evidence conclusively demonstrates that the risks to both mother and especially to children are substantially greater with one twin birth compared with two singleton births. Thus, the arguments used by some to promote multiple embryo transfer and twinning are not supported by the facts. They should not detract from efforts to further promote SET and thus reduce ART-associated multiple pregnancy and its inherent risks.

During IVF treatment patient preference shifts from singletons towards twins but only a few patients show an actual reversal of preference

BACKGROUND

Knowledge of patients' preferences for elective single embryo transfer (eSET) or double embryo transfer (DET) and for singletons or twins is of great importance in counselling for embryo transfer (ET) strategies. In this study, the stability of IVF patients' preferences over time for either a healthy single child or healthy twins was measured and we investigated which factors could explain preference shifts.

METHODS

Infertile women (n = 177) who participated in an RCT comparing one cycle eSET with one cycle DET were included. A satisfaction questionnaire was developed to measure patient preferences and attitudes at two moments in time, i.e. at 2 weeks before ET and at 2 weeks following ET, after the results of the pregnancy test. Regression analysis examined the effect of several variables on preference shifts.

RESULTS

Before ET, most patients expressed a preference for a singleton, whereas most patients were indifferent 2 weeks after ET, resulting in an overall preference shift towards twins (P = 0.002; n = 145). Overall, 62% of patients showed a preference shift. Preference shifts were explained by patients' global satisfaction of the information given by the fertility clinic staff received by the fertility clinic staff, and an interaction between the occurrence of pregnancy and transfer policy (eSET or DET).

CONCLUSIONS

In general, patients' preferences for a singleton or twins are not stable during IVF treatment. Possible explanations of a shift in preference are that pregnant patients attuned their preferences to what they expect their pregnancy to result in, whereas non-pregnant patients shifted towards a preference for twins in order to be able to fulfil their ultimate child wish.