Efficacy of psychosocial interventions for pregnancy rates of infertile women undergoing in vitro fertilization: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The clinical effectiveness of the Mind/Body Program for Infertility on wellbeing and assisted reproduction outcomes: a randomized controlled trial in search for active ingredients

STUDY QUESTION

Does the Mind/Body Program for Infertility (MBPI) perform better, due to certain distinctive elements, than a partly matched support group in improving the wellbeing and medically assisted reproduction (MAR) outcomes of women with elevated distress levels in a clinical setting?

SUMMARY ANSWER

While robust enhancements occurred in the wellbeing overall, the cognitive behavioural and formalized stress management elements of the MBPI allowed a significantly stronger improvement in trait anxiety, but not in other mental health and MAR outcomes, compared with a support group.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Mind-body psychological programmes adjacent to MAR have been found to improve women's mental states and possibly increase chances of pregnancy. However, not enough is known about the programme's effectiveness among patients with elevated distress levels in routine clinical settings, nor is it clear which of its particular ingredients are specifically effective.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

A pre-post design, single-centre, randomized controlled trial was performed between December 2019 and October 2022 (start and end of recruitment, respectively). The sample size (n = 168) was calculated to detect superiority of the MBPI in improving fertility-related quality of life. Randomization was computer-based, with random numbers concealing identities of patients until after allocation.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

The trial was conducted at a large university teaching hospital. A total of 168 patients were randomly assigned to the mind-body (MBPI) group (n = 84) and the fertility support (FS) control group (n = 84). Patients received a 10-week, 135-min/week group intervention, with the FS group following the same format as the MBPI group, but with a less restricted and systematic content, and without the presumed effective factors. The number of patients analysed was n = 74 (MBPI) and n = 68 (FS) for post-intervention psychological outcomes, and n = 54 (MBPI) and n = 56 (FS) for pregnancy outcomes at a 30-month follow-up.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Significant improvements occurred in both groups in all psychological domains (adjusted P < 0.001), except for treatment-related quality of life. Linear mixed-model regression analysis did not reveal significantly greater pre-post improvements in the MBPI group than in the FS group in fertility-related quality of life (difference in differences (DD) = 4.11 [0.42, 7.80], d = 0.32, adjusted P = 0.124), treatment-related quality of life (DD = -3.08 [-7.72, 1.55], d = -0.20, adjusted P = 0.582), infertility-specific stress (DD = -2.54 [-4.68, 0.41], d = -0.36, adjusted P = 0.105), depression (DD = -1.16 [3.61, 1.29], d = -0.13, adjusted P = 0.708), and general stress (DD = -0.62 [-1.91, 0.68], d = -0.13, adjusted P = 0.708), but it did show a significantly larger improvement in trait anxiety (DD = -3.60 [-6.16, -1.04], d = -0.32, adjusted P = 0.042). Logistic regression showed no group effect on MAR pregnancies, spontaneous pregnancies, or live births.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The follow-up only covered MAR-related medical outcomes and no psychological variables, and their rates were not equal in the two groups. Biological factors other than age, aetiology, and duration of infertility may have confounded the study results. Loss to follow-up was between 5% and 10%, which may have led to some bias.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

The psychologically and medically heterogeneous sample, the normal clinical setting and the low attrition rate all raise the external validity and generalizability of our study. The MBPI works not only in controlled conditions, but also in routine MAR practice, where it can be introduced as a cost-effective, low-intensity psychological intervention, within the framework of stepped care. More studies are needed to further identify its active ingredients.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. The authors have no conflict of interest to disclose.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04151485.

TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE

5 November 2019.

DATE OF FIRST PATIENT’S ENROLMENT

15 December 2019.

The SCREENIVF Hungarian version is a valid and reliable measure accurately predicting possible depression in female infertility patients

Infertility patients, often in high distress, are entitled to being informed about their mental status compared to normative data. The objective of this study was to revalidate and test the accuracy of the SCREENIVF, a self-reported tool for screening psychological maladjustment in the assisted reproduction context. A cross-sectional, questionnaire-based online survey was carried out between December 2019 and February 2023 in a consecutive sample of female patients (N = 645, response rate 22.9%) in a university-based assisted reproduction center in Hungary. Confirmatory factor analysis and cluster and ROC analyses were applied to test validity, sensitivity and specificity in relation to Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) scores. Model fit was optimal (chi-square = 630.866, p < 0.001; comparative fit index = 0.99; root-mean-square error of approximation = 0.018 (90% CI 0.013-0.023); standardized-root-mean-square-residual = 0.044), and all dimensions were reliable (α > 0.80). A specific combination of cutoffs correctly predicted 87.4% of BDI-scores possibly indicative of moderate-to-severe depression (χ2(1) = 220.608, p < 0.001, Nagelkerke R2 = 0.462, J = 66.4). The Hungarian version of the SCREENIVF is a valid and reliable tool, with high accuracy in predicting BDI-scores. Low response rate may affect generalizability. The same instrument with different cutoffs can serve various clinical goals.

Adherence to dietary recommendations mediates the effect of affective temperaments on infertility treatment outcomes

Affective temperaments have been shown to robustly affect infertility treatment success. However, identification of possible mediating factors through which they exert their influence is still lacking. A growing number of results suggest that adherence to recommended treatments may be such a mediator, on the one hand, because affective temperaments are known to influence adherence and, on the other hand, because non-adherence negatively influences the treatment outcome. Recommended treatment of infertility involves, beyond medications, dietary and lifestyle changes. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to evaluate whether adherence to physician-prescribed diet and physical activity recommendations mediates the effect of affective temperaments on infertility treatment outcomes. Among 308 women who underwent infertility treatment in an Assisted Reproduction Center, affective temperaments, adherence to diet, adherence to physical exercise, and infertility treatment success (clinical pregnancy) were assessed besides detailed medical history and demographic parameters. Associations between affective temperaments, adherence to diet and recommended physical activity, and assisted reproduction outcomes were analyzed using generalized linear models and causal mediation analysis. Adherence to physical activity didn't have an effect, but diet adherence increased the odds of infertility treatment success by 130% suggesting its role as a potential mediator. Based on causal mediation analysis, higher depressive and anxious temperament scores were directly associated with 63% and 45% lower odds of achieving clinical pregnancy, respectively, with effects not mediated by diet adherence. Higher irritable temperament scores indirectly decreased the odds of achieving clinical pregnancy by 14%, mediated by diet adherence; while higher cyclothymic temperament scores decreased the odds of achieving clinical pregnancy both directly by 51% and indirectly, mediated by diet adherence by 11%. Our results suggest that diet adherence mediates the mechanism by which irritable and cyclothymic affective temperaments influence IVF treatment success. Since adherence is a modifiable risk factor of infertility treatment success, screening for affective temperaments may help to identify potentially high-risk non-adherent patient groups and offer patient-tailored treatment, which may help increase the chances of a successful pregnancy and live birth in women undergoing IVF treatment.