Barriers to fertility care for racial/ethnic minority groups: a qualitative systematic review

Preliminary testing of "roadmap to parenthood" decision aid and planning tool for family building after cancer: Results of a single-arm pilot study

OBJECTIVE

Many young adult female cancer survivors need to use reproductive medicine, surrogacy, or adoption to have a child. This study pilot tested Roadmap to Parenthood, a web-based, self-guided decision aid and planning tool for family building after cancer (disease agnostic).

METHODS

A single-arm pilot study tested feasibility, acceptability, and obtained effect size estimates of the Roadmap tool. Participants, recruited via hospital-based and social media strategies, completed a baseline survey (T1), accessed the Roadmap tool (website), then completed surveys at one- and 3-months (T2 and T3, respectively). Feasibility and acceptability were evaluated with rates of eligibility, enrollment, and survey completion, and feedback. Pairwise t-tests and repeated measures ANOVA evaluated usage effects. Effect size estimates were calculated.

RESULTS

Participants (N = 98) averaged 31 years old (SD = 5.61); 71% were nulliparous. Enrollment rate was 73%, T1-T2 completion rate was 80%, and 93% accessed the website. From T1-T2, participants reported improvements in decisional conflict (p < 0.001; Cohen's d = 0.85), unmet information needs (p < 0.001; Cohen's d = 0.70), self-efficacy (p = 0.003; Cohen's d = 0.40), and self-efficacy for managing negative emotions (p = 0.03; Cohen's d = 0.29); effects were sustained at T3. There was no change in reproductive distress (p = 0.22). By T3, 94% reported increased consideration of preparatory actions and 20%-61% completed such actions.

CONCLUSIONS

The Roadmap intervention was feasible to conduct, acceptable to users, and led to improvements in key psychosocial outcomes. Future directions will test intervention efficacy in a randomized controlled trial with a larger sample and over a longer period. A web-based tool may help women make decisions about family building after cancer and prepare for potential challenges.

The Racial and Socioeconomic Characteristics of Men Using Mail-in Semen Testing Kits in the United States

OBJECTIVE

To describe the racial and socioeconomic characteristics of men using mail-in semen testing kits for their fertility care in the United States over 3 years.

METHODS

A cross-sectional analysis was conducted of men who used mail-in semen analyses from a single direct-to-consumer (DTC) fertility platform between 2020 and 2022. Age, race/ethnicity, place of residence, and education level of men using mail-in semen analysis kits was collected from user questionnaires. Zip code level socioeconomic status was estimated using the Area Deprivation Index (ADI). These characteristics were compared to the overall population of the United States.

RESULTS

4342 men used mail-in semen analyses from a single DTC fertility company between 2020 and 2022 and completed the questionnaire. The median age of this cohort was 36 (IQR: 32,40) years. The group consisted of predominantly white men (72%), with 7.9% Asian and only 5.1% Black, 3.2% Hispanic, 0.4% Indian American, 0.1% pacific islander, 5.8% mixed race, and 2.8% other groups. 45.8% of the group had completed college, 22% had a master's degree, and 9% had a doctoral degree. The mean ADI was 83.47 (SD 21.44) compared to the average ADI of 100 for the general US population (P < .005).

CONCLUSION

DTC mail-in semen analyses have the potential to improve access to affordable fertility care. Racial and ethnic minorities and lower socioeconomic classes are underrepresented for men seeking DTC fertility testing as they are for men presenting for in-office fertility care. Additional studies are needed to determine the factors responsible for these discrepancies.

Greater fertility distress and avoidance relate to poorer decision making about family building after cancer among adolescent and young adult female survivors

BACKGROUND

Many adolescent and young adult female (AYA-F) cancer survivors face decisions about family building using reproductive medicine or adoption to achieve parenthood. This study evaluated associations among reproductive distress, avoidance, and family-building decision making and identified sociodemographic and clinical characteristics related to high distress and avoidance.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey assessed AYA-F survivors' oncofertility experiences. Measures included an investigator-designed Unmet Information Needs scale, Reproductive Concerns After Cancer Scale, Impact of Events Scale-Avoidance subscale, Decision Self-Efficacy scale, and Decision Conflict Scale. Two linear regression models evaluated correlates of decision self-efficacy and decisional conflict about family building after cancer. Bivariate analyses evaluated correlates of avoidance using Pearson's correlation, t-test, and ANOVA.

RESULTS

AYA-Fs (N = 111) averaged 31-years-old (SD = 5.49) and 3 years post-treatment (range: 1-23 years); 90% were nulliparous. Most common diagnoses were leukemia (24%) and breast cancer (22%). Average decisional conflict was 52.12 (SD = 23.87, range: 0-100); 74% of the sample reported DCS scores within the clinically significant range. Higher levels of reproductive distress (B = -0.23, p = 0.04) and avoidance (B = -0.24, p = 0.02) related to lower decision self-efficacy. Younger age (B = -0.18, p = 0.03), greater unmet information needs (B = 0.33, p < 0.001), and higher levels of reproductive distress (B = 0.34, p = 0.001) related to worse decisional conflict. Predictors of distress and avoidance were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

After cancer treatment, high fertility distress and avoidant coping were associated with poorer quality decision making about family building after cancer. Fertility counseling post-treatment should support self-efficacy and constructive coping skills to counteract high distress, maladaptive coping, and facilitate values-based decision making.

The Impact of Cancer-Related Financial Toxicity on Reproductive Concerns and Family-Building Decision-Making in Post-Treatment Survivorship

Purpose: Adolescent and young adult (AYA) survivors are at-risk for cancer-related financial difficulties (i.e., financial toxicity [FT]). Family building after cancer often requires reproductive medicine or adoption with high costs; AYAs experience financial barriers to family building. This study evaluated the relationships among cancer FT, reproductive concerns, and decision-making processes about family building after cancer. Methods: AYA female (AYA-F) cancer survivors completed a cross-sectional survey including measures of FT, reproductive concerns, decisional conflict about family building, and decision-making self-efficacy. Differences across FT subgroups (i.e., no/mild, moderate, and severe FT) were tested. Linear regression evaluated the relationships between FT and reproductive concerns and decision-making processes. Results: Participants (N = 111) averaged 31.0 years (standard deviation [SD] = 5.49), 90% were nulliparous, and 84% were employed full/part-time. The overall FT levels were in the "moderate" range (M = 20.44, SD = 9.83); 48% worried quite a bit or very much about financial problems because of cancer. AYA-Fs reporting severe FT (24% of sample) experienced higher levels of reproductive concerns compared with those reporting no/mild and moderate FT. Those reporting moderate FT (46% of sample) reported greater decisional conflict about family-building options, compared with the no/mild FT subgroup. Both moderate and severe FT subgroups reported lower decision-making self-efficacy compared with the no/mild FT subgroup. In separate models controlling for covariates, greater FT related to higher levels of reproductive concerns (B = -0.39, p < 0.001), greater decisional conflict about family building (B = -0.56, p = 0.02), and lower decision-making self-efficacy (B = 0.60, p = 0.01). Conclusions: Given the high costs of reproductive medicine and adoption, fertility counseling pre- and post-treatment must address survivors' financial concerns and barriers.

Pregnancy and childbirth during incarceration: A qualitative systematic review of lived experiences

BACKGROUND

Incarcerated individuals who experience pregnancy or childbirth in correctional facilities face unique considerations for obstetric care and consequently are at greater risk of adverse maternal and fetal outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

To characterise patient experiences regarding pregnancy and childbirth during incarceration via qualitative synthesis.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Medline-OVID, EMBASE, CINAHL, Sociological Abstracts, Social Work Abstracts, Web of Science, Scopus and PsycInfo were systematically searched from inception to 24 December 2020. Supplementary searches were performed using the Scopus database.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Only original, peer-reviewed literature was examined. Eligible studies were assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Qualitative Research.

RESULTS

After screening 4173 original database citations, 24 studies that met inclusion criteria were included and analysed via thematic analysis. The 24 studies included perspectives from 645 female patients who had experienced incarceration, 69 healthcare providers and 70 prison staff. Key patient-reported concerns for the well-being of pregnant individuals during incarceration included mental health challenges, dehumanisation of prenatal care and delivery, lack of privacy, stigma, psychological trauma, lack of emotional support and shackle usage during pregnancy and/or labour. The studies reported a lack of support for patients to access female correctional officers or guards, privacy during intimate examinations, timely medical care and support for breastfeeding. Above all, the psychological trauma of separation from one's newborn after birth was of utmost devastation.

CONCLUSIONS

Our systematic review highlights the dire need for accountability and interventions to improve pregnancy and childbirth care for incarcerated individuals.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

This systematic review describes lived experiences of pregnancy & childbirth during incarceration, including dehumanisation, psychological trauma, and use of shackles.

Racial/ethnic disparities in infertility treatment utilization in the US, 2011-2019

With delayed child-bearing age, there has been an increase in infertility rates globally and in the United States (US). Unsurprisingly, there has been a concomitant substantial increase in the number of individuals seeking infertility treatments over the last decade. This study aimed to examine the relationship between race/ethnicity and the utilization of different infertility treatments over the previous decade. We conducted this retrospective cohort study using the United States (US) Birth data files 2011-2019. We calculated the rates of infertility treatment and its subtypes over the study period. Descriptive statistics were utilized to examine the sociodemographic and birth characteristics for overall births and those associated with any infertility treatment and each of its subtypes. We calculated the level of association between race/ethnicity and utilization of infertility treatment and the subtypes using adjusted logistic regression models. We found that the rate of infertility treatments for all subtypes considered, had steadily increased by 63.7% within the past decade. In contrast, fertility enhancing drugs or Intrauterine Insemination (IUI) increased by 134%, and in vitro fertilization (IVF), gamete intrafallopian transfer (GIFT), and zygote intrafallopian transfer (ZIFT) treatments increased by 40% over the 9-year study period. Non-Hispanic (NH) Asian women had the highest rate of any infertility treatment with a rate of 25 per 1000 births whereas Hispanic women had the lowest rate of any infertility treatment at 5.8 per 1000 births. When compared with NH-White women, NH-Asian women had a modest 7% lower likelihood (OR = 0.93, 95% CI = 0.92-0.94) of receiving any infertility treatment while NH-Black and Hispanic women had about 70% lower likelihood of receiving any infertility treatment. Our report of increased assisted reproductive technology (ART) utilization rates, and marked racial/ethnic differences in ART utilization highlight the importance of expanding knowledge of inequities that continue to impact marginalized groups, a critical step for informing actionable strategy formulations (i.e., advocacy, policy change, patient education, provider training) to address these inequities.

LGBTQ2S+ childbearing individuals and perinatal mental health: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

The perinatal period may uniquely impact the mental health and wellbeing of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and Two-Spirit (LGBTQ2S+) childbearing individuals.

OBJECTIVES

To characterise and synthesise the experiences of LGBTQ2S+ childbearing individuals regarding perinatal mental health, including symptomatology, access to care and care-seeking.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We conducted and reported a systematic review following PRISMA guidelines of eight databases (EMBASE, MEDLINE-OVID, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science: Core Collection, Sociological Abstracts, Social Work Abstract, and PsycINFO) from inception to 1 March 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Original, peer-reviewed research related to LGBTQ2S+ mental health was eligible for inclusion if the study was specific to the perinatal period (defined as pregnancy planning, conception, pregnancy, childbirth, and first year postpartum; includes miscarriages, fertility treatments and surrogacy).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Findings were synthesised qualitatively via meta-aggregation using the Joanna Briggs Institute System for the Unified Management, Assessment and Review of Information (JBI SUMARI), and the ConQual approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Our systematic search included 26 eligible studies encompassing 1199 LGBTQ2S+ childbearing participants. Using the JBI SUMARI approach, we reported 65 results, which we synthesised as six key findings. The studies described unique considerations for LGBTQ2S+ individuals' perinatal mental health, including heteronormativity, cisnormativity, isolation, exclusion from traditional pregnancy care, stigma, and distressing situations from the gendered nature of pregnancy. Many participants described a lack of knowledge from healthcare providers related to care for LGBTQ2S+ individuals. In addition, LGBTQ2S+ individuals described barriers to accessing mental healthcare and gaps in health systems. Strategies to improve care include provider education, avoidance of gendered language, documentation of correct pronouns, trauma-informed practices, cultural humility training and tailored care for LGBTQ2S+ people.

CONCLUSIONS

Pregnancy, postpartum, and the perinatal period uniquely impacts the mental health and wellbeing of LGBTQ2S+individuals, largely due to systems-level inequities and exclusion from perinatal care. Healthcare providers should implement the identified strategies to improve perinatal care and address inequities.

The psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on fertility care: a qualitative systematic review

The objective of this systematic review was to characterise psychological impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic related to fertility care. We conducted a systematic search following PRISMA guidelines of five databases (EMBASE, Medline-OVID, CINAHL, Web of Science, and PsycINFO) from March 17^th 2020 to April 10^th 2021. Citing articles were also hand-searched using Scopus. Of the 296 original citations, we included fifteen studies that encompassed 5,851 patients seeking fertility care. Eleven studies only included female participants, while four included both male and female participants. The fifteen studies unanimously concluded that the COVID-19 pandemic caused negative psychological impacts on fertility care. Risk factors included female sex, single marital state, previous ART failure, prior diagnoses of anxiety or depression, and length of time trying to conceive. Specific concerns included the worry and frustration of clinic closure, concerns about pregnancy and COVID-19 infection, and advancing age. There were contrasting beliefs on whether the decision to stop fertility treatments during the COVID-19 pandemic was justified. In addition, we found that many patients preferred to resume fertility treatment, despite anxieties regarding the risk of the COVID-19 virus. We recommend that fertility providers screen patients for risk factors for poor mental health and tailor support for virtual care.

Cultural competence in fertility care for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer people: a systematic review of patient and provider perspectives

OBJECTIVE

To characterize the patient and provider perspectives on cultural competence in lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) fertility care.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

SETTING

Not applicable.

PATIENT(S)

LGBTQ+ patients and their partners treated for fertility-related care; fertility providers who treat LGBTQ+ patients.

INTERVENTION(S)

We conducted a systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines of six databases: Medline-OVID, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.Gov, and PsycInfo. Citations of full-text articles were hand-searched using the Scopus database. Eligible studies were assessed using the Risk of Bias Instrument for Cross-Sectional Surveys of Attitudes and Practices, as well as the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Qualitative Research. All screening, extraction, and appraisal were completed in duplicate with two independent reviewers.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Patient-reported or provider-reported views on LGBTQ+ cultural competence in fertility care, including barriers and facilitators to inclusive care.

RESULT(S)

Of the 1,747 original database citations, we included 25 studies that met the inclusion criteria. Of the 21 studies that evaluated patient perspectives, 13 studies targeted same-sex cisgender couples while the remainder targeted transgender and gender-nonconforming participants (n = 6) or any individual who identified as a sexual or gender minority (n = 2). Key barriers for LGBTQ+ participants included gender dysphoria, heteronormativity, stigmatization, and psychological distress. The lack of tailored information for LGBTQ+ populations was repeatedly highlighted as a concern. Promising solutions included tailored information, psychosocial interventions, gender-neutral language, and inclusive intake processes.

CONCLUSION(S)

LGBTQ+ individuals face unique barriers in fertility care, as described by both patients and providers. This review describes a number of implementable solutions for equitable care, which should be given priority for both research and hospital interventions.