Initial management of infertility: an audit of pre-referral investigations and exploration of couples' views at the interface of primary and secondary care

General practitioners' adherence to work-up and referral recommendations in fertility care

STUDY QUESTION

What is the current guideline adherence by general practitioners (GPs) for work-up and subsequent referral from primary to secondary care for patients suffering from infertility?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Guideline adherence by GPs concerning infertility was 9.2% in couples referred.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Adherence to recommendations can decrease unnecessary referral, diagnostics and treatments, and consequently result in lower expenditures. Moreover, patients can be saved from unnecessary hospital visits, emotional burden and out of pocket costs.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, AND DURATION

A retrospective cohort study among 306 patients referred for basic fertility work-up between January 2011 and June 2013 from primary care to a secondary care teaching hospital or a tertiary hospital with IVF facilities.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING AND METHODS

Couples were eligible to participate when there was no previous referral for fertility problems and the duration of the child wish was <2 years. Data to assess guideline adherence were collected from the referral letter and the medical records. A patient questionnaire was used to determine patients' general and fertility-related characteristics.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The GP performed a Chlamydia Antibody Titre (CAT) testing and semen analysis as recommended in 15.9% and 42.2% of the referred patients, respectively. According to the guideline, 39% of the couples were under referred (i.e. not immediately referred as recommended), 8.8% were unnecessarily referred and the CAT and semen analysis were unnecessarily repeated in secondary care in 80.0% and 57.1% of cases, respectively.

LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION

We could not include non-referred patients with expectant management in primary care, an unknown number of whom became pregnant in this period. This may have resulted in an underestimation of primary care performance.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Our findings show that guideline adherence concerning work-up and subsequent referral for fertility problems is low. The influence of patient demands for referral remains largely unknown. Barriers and facilitators for guideline adherence should be determined to develop interventions to improve guideline adherence in the areas of work-up and referral for fertility care and to diminish duplicate tests in secondary care.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

Funded by CZ, a Dutch healthcare insurer (grant number AFVV 11-232). CZ had no role in designing the study, data collection, analysis and interpretation of data or writing of the report. Competing interests: None.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Not applicable.

Preclinic investigations accelerate decision-making, reduce delays in treatment and are highly popular with endocrinology patients and staff

OBJECTIVE

Endocrine diagnosis relies on a thorough history, examination and confirmatory biochemical tests. Previously, in our unit, tests were performed after new patients attended clinic. We proposed that diagnosis and management would be improved if this system was inverted.

DESIGN

Clinicians and chemical pathologists reviewed available guidance and local practice to determine the key tests to confirm or refute most common endocrine disorders. A system was developed for clinicians to categorize new referrals into diagnostic groups: for example, nodular thyroid disease or possible polycystic ovarian syndrome. Standard letters were developed and sent to patients explaining the requirement for tests to be performed prior to first hospital appointment. The letters and requests for investigation sets were standardized for each diagnostic group and generated via a one-click automated method. After one year, clinical outcomes were audited and patients and staff surveyed.

RESULTS

The time from referral to confirming diagnosis and starting treatment was halved: mean 11·8-5·7 weeks (P < 0·001). Acute patients were also discharged from clinic earlier: mean 17 to 10·3 weeks (P < 0·005). Ninety four percent patients surveyed had their tests performed easily prior to attending their appointment. Hundred per cent of patients, 100% of hospital staff and 93% referring general practitioners who responded felt the system improved patient care and should continue.

CONCLUSIONS

Performing investigations prior to new patient appointments is practical, popular with staff and patients and has dramatically improved our referral to treatment statistics by reducing delays prior to diagnosis. This system could be used as a model for other departments.

Expectations towards medical personnel – a study with infertility clinic patients

<b>Background</b><br /> Contacts with medical personnel are important for patients’ experiences. The role of physicians’ psychosocial competence was noted in Polish studies, but systematic analyses of infertile patients’ expectations have not been conducted. This study was designed to learn about patients’ views on relationships with medical personnel. It was assumed that: 1) staff involvement in infertility treatment would be reflected in expectations towards persons in different roles, 2) expectations might be related to patients’ gender, duration of infertility, and type of treatment, 3) expectations of couples would be related.<br /> <br /> <b>Participants and procedure</b><br /> Fifty-one married couples filled in a purposely designed questionnaire. Items related to information, attitudes and support were divided into three sections – expectations towards physicians, other medical personnel, psychologists – and were scored on a scale of 1 to 5 points.<br /> <br /> <b>Results</b><br /> No gender effect of duration of treatment, type of infertility or treatment method on expectations was found. Partners expected the same level of information from physicians and the same level of emotional support from psychologists. Other expectations were consistently higher in women. There was a clear division of expectations towards different groups of personnel – the expectation to make the best medical choices was assigned to physicians, while the expectation to provide a supportive relationship and coping skills was assigned to psychologists, but all were expected to respect patients’ privacy, choices and decisions.<br /> <br /> <b>Conclusions</b><br /> The findings indicate the division of expectations towards different groups of personnel, with the tendency of women to articulate their expectations more clearly and strongly, but towards the same aspects of staff functioning as men do.

Women's views of a fertility awareness and hormonal support approach to subfertility

The aim of this study was to determine the satisfaction among subfertile women of a fertility awareness-based approach, including hormonal therapy to achieve a pregnancy by natural conception. Eighty four women attending a natural fertility service completed a postal questionnaire exploring (1) the acceptability of the sympto-thermal method and (2) the acceptability of using hormone support. Acceptability rates for the fertility charting, clinical service and clinical care were 64.9-91.6%. Acceptability rates were higher in women who did conceive or had experienced past recurrent miscarriages. Taking hormonal luteal support, by any method, was more acceptable for women over 35 years compared to those under 35 years (100% vs. 69.4%, p = 0.014). Vaginal pessaries were the preferred route of administration. The use of a fertility awareness-based method appears to be acceptable amongst subfertile women intending to conceive naturally. Most women using such a method for conception would be open to the use of hormonal support during the fertility cycle or early pregnancy.

Reassured or fobbed off? Perspectives on infertility consultations in primary care: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Infertility affects 9% of couples in the UK. Most couples who visit their GP because they are worried about their fertility will ultimately conceive, but a few will not. Treatment usually happens in secondary care, but GPs can have an invaluable role in starting investigations, referring, and giving support throughout treatment and beyond.

AIM

To inform clinical practice by exploring primary care experiences of infertility treatment among females and males, and discussing findings with a reference group of GPs to explore practice experience.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A qualitative patient interview and GP focus group study. Interviews were conducted in patients homes in England and Scotland; the focus group was held at a national conference.

METHOD

An in-depth interview study was conducted with 27 females and 11 males. A maximum variation sample was sought and interviews were transcribed for thematic analysis. Results were discussed with a focus group of GPs to elicit their views.

RESULTS

Feeling that they were being taken seriously was very important to patients. Some felt that their concerns were not taken seriously, or that their GP did not appear to be well informed about infertility. The focus group of GPs highlighted the role of protocols in their management of patients who are infertile, as well as the difficulty GPs faced in communicating both reassurance and engagement.

CONCLUSION

Simple things that GPs say and do, such as describing the 'action plan' at the first consultation, could make a real difference to demonstrating that they are taking the fertility problem seriously.

Supporting the couple with conception challenges

Current literature indicates a lack of direction for NPs managing the psychosocial needs of couples who are having difficulty with conception but have not yet been diagnosed as infertile. A protocol is presented for NPs in the primary care setting to assist them in providing psychosocial support for these couples.

The patients' perspective on fertility care: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Open Access Tubal aSsessment for the initial management of infertility in general practice (the OATS trial): a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

GPs investigate approximately half of all infertile couples with semen analysis and endocrine blood tests. For assessment of tubal status, hysterosalpingography (HSG) is recommended as a first-line investigation for women not known to have comorbidities.

AIM

To test whether providing GPs with open access to HSG results in infertile couples progressing to a diagnosis and management plan sooner than with usual management.

DESIGN OF STUDY

A pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

Seventy-one of 173 general practices in north-east England agreed to participate.

METHOD

A total of 670 infertile couples presented to 33 intervention practices and 25 control practices over a 2-year period. Practices allocated to the intervention group had access to HSG for those infertile women who fulfilled predefined eligibility criteria. The primary outcome measure was the interval between presentation to the GP and the couple receiving a diagnosis and management plan.

RESULTS

An annual incidence of 0.8 couples per 1000 total population equated to each GP seeing an average of one or two infertile couples each year. Open access HSG was used for 9% of all infertile women who presented to the intervention practices during the study period. The time to reach a diagnosis and management plan for all infertile couples presenting was not affected by the availability of open access HSG (Cox regression hazard ratio = 0.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.7 to 1.1). For couples who reached a diagnosis and management plan, there was a non-significant difference in time to primary outcome for intervention versus control practices (32.5 weeks versus 30.5 weeks, mean difference 2.2 weeks, 95% CI = 1.6 to 6.1 weeks, P = 0.1). The intracluster correlation coefficient was 0.03 across all practices.

CONCLUSION

Providing GPs with open access to HSG had no effect on the time taken to reach a diagnosis and management plan for couples with infertility.