Restorative reproductive medicine for infertility in two family medicine clinics in New England, an observational study

Fertility Knowledge and Educational Experiences of Graduating Medical Students: A Multi-Institution Survey

Objective: Our goal was to assess the fertility knowledge and educational experiences of graduating U.S. medical students to evaluate areas of improvement for future educational interventions. Design: Web-based cross-sectional survey. Subjects: Medical students graduating in 2023 from the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine (SOM), New York University (NYU) Grossman SOM, Wayne State University SOM, Perelman SOM at the University of Pennsylvania, and Mayo Clinic Alix SOM. Main Outcome Measures: Fertility-related knowledge and educational experiences of U.S. medical students in their final year of school. Results: In total, 117 students (14.4%) completed the survey. The average knowledge score was 78%. Twenty-three (22%) overestimated the age of most precipitous fertility decline, and 50 (52%) overestimated the chance of getting pregnant for a 40-year-old person with ovaries. One-third of students (30, 32%) incorrectly believe that physicians have equivalent infertility rates to the general population. Students were less cognizant of male fertility issues, incorrectly believing there was no negative impact on male fertility by age (43, 42%) among other factors. Seventy-five (81%) reported less than 5 hours of fertility-related education in medical school. Only one-third (32%) were satisfied or very satisfied with the fertility education they received. In an open-response question, students expressed interest in additional education on transgender and cancer patient care, fertility preservation, assisted reproductive technologies, and reproductive life planning in medicine. Conclusions: There is a need and an opportunity for medical education programs to enhance fertility education. Giving students and trainees the knowledge required to make informed decisions for their family-building purposes and improving their ability to counsel patients adequately should be a goal of future educational endeavors. The data collected in this study will serve as a guide for the development of fertility-related learning modules for medical students and trainees.

Examining the co-occurrence of endometriosis and polycystic ovarian syndrome

BACKGROUND

Polycystic ovarian syndrome and endometriosis are 2 of the most common reproductive disorders among women but are thought to be unrelated.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to examine the overlap and common symptoms of polycystic ovarian syndrome and endometriosis.

STUDY DESIGN

The study population included the Endometriosis, Natural History, Diagnosis, and Outcomes Study (2007-2009) operative cohort: 473 women, aged 18 to 44 years, who underwent a diagnostic and/or therapeutic laparoscopy or laparotomy at 1 of 14 surgical centers located in Salt Lake City, Utah, or San Francisco, California, in addition to a population cohort composed of 127 women from the surgical centers' catchment areas. Age and site-adjusted multinomial regression models were used to estimate adjusted prevalence ratios and 95% confidence intervals of reproductive history characteristics among women with endometriosis only, women with polycystic ovarian syndrome only, and women with both endometriosis and polycystic ovarian syndrome.

RESULTS

Among the operative cohort, 35% had endometriosis only, 9% had polycystic ovarian syndrome only, and 5% had endometriosis and polycystic ovarian syndrome. Among the population cohort, 10% had endometriosis only, 8% had polycystic ovarian syndrome only, and 2% had endometriosis and polycystic ovarian syndrome. In the operative cohort, a history of subfertility was associated with a higher adjusted probability of having both conditions (adjusted prevalence ratio, 10.33; 95% confidence interval, 3.94-27.08), followed by having endometriosis only (adjusted prevalence ratio, 2.45; 95% confidence interval, 1.56-3.84) or polycystic ovarian syndrome only (adjusted prevalence ratio, 1.15; 95% confidence interval, 0.51-2.61), than having neither condition. In addition, experiencing chronic pelvic pain within the past 12 months was associated with a higher probability of having both conditions (adjusted prevalence ratio, 2.53; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-6.00) than having neither condition.

CONCLUSION

Among a cohort of women undergoing gynecologic laparoscopy or laparotomy, our study found that nearly 1 in 20 women had both an incident endometriosis diagnosis and symptoms consistent with polycystic ovarian syndrome. Among a population cohort of women not seeking gynecologic care, polycystic ovarian syndrome and endometriosis overlap prevalence was approximately 1 in 50 women.

International Natural Procreative Technology Evaluation and Surveillance of Treatment for Subfertility (iNEST): enrollment and methods

STUDY QUESTION

What is the feasibility of a prospective protocol to follow subfertile couples being treated with natural procreative technology for up to 3 years at multiple clinical sites?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Overall, clinical sites had missing data for about one-third of participants, the proportion of participants responding to follow-up questionnaires during time periods when participant compensation was available (about two-thirds) was double that of time periods when participant compensation was not available (about one-third) and follow-up information was most complete for pregnancies and births (obtained from both clinics and participants).

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Several retrospective single-clinic studies from Canada, Ireland and the USA, with subfertile couples receiving restorative reproductive medicine, mostly natural procreative technology, have reported adjusted cumulative live birth rates ranging from 29% to 66%, for treatment for up to 2 years, with a mean women’s age of about 35 years.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

The international Natural Procreative Technology Evaluation and Surveillance of Treatment for Subfertility (iNEST) was designed as a multicenter, prospective cohort study, to enroll subfertile couples seeking treatment for live birth, assess baseline characteristics and follow them up for up to 3 years to report diagnoses, treatments and outcomes of pregnancy and live birth. In addition to obtaining data from medical record abstraction, we sent follow-up questionnaires to participants (both women and men) to obtain information about treatments and pregnancy outcomes, including whether they obtained treatment elsewhere. The study was conducted from 2006 to 2016, with a total of 10 clinics participating for at least some of the study period across four countries (Canada, Poland, UK and USA).

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

The 834 participants were subfertile couples with the woman’s age 18 years or more, not pregnant and seeking a live birth, with at least one clinic visit. Couples with known absolute infertility were excluded (i.e. bilateral tubal blockage, azoospermia). Most women were trained to use a standardized protocol for daily vulvar observation, description and recording of cervical mucus and vaginal bleeding (the Creighton Model FertilityCare System). Couples received medical and sometimes surgical evaluation and treatments aimed to restore and optimize female and male reproductive function, to facilitate in vivo conception.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The mean age of women starting treatment was 34.0 years; among those with additional demographic data, 382/478 (80%) had 16 or more years of education, and 199/659 (30%) had a prior live birth. Across 10 clinical sites in four countries (mostly private clinical practices) with family physicians or obstetrician–gynecologists, data about clinic visits were submitted for 60% of participants, and diagnostic data for 77%. For data obtained directly from the couple, 59% of couples had at least one follow-up questionnaire, and the proportion of women and men responding to fill out the follow-up questionnaires was 69% and 67%, respectively, when participant financial compensation was available, compared to 38% and 33% when compensation was not available. Among all couples, 57% had at least one pregnancy and 44% at least one live birth during the follow-up time period, based on data obtained from clinic and/or participant questionnaires. All sites reported on female pelvic surgical procedures, and among all participants, 22% of females underwent a pelvic diagnostic and/or therapeutic procedure, predominantly laparoscopy and hysterosalpingography. Among the 643 (77%) of participants with diagnostic information, ovulation-related disorders were diagnosed in 87%, endometriosis in 31%, nutritional disorders in 47% and abnormalities of semen analysis in 24%. The mean number of diagnoses per couple was 4.7.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The level of missing data was higher than anticipated, which limits both generalizability and the ability to study different components of treatment and prognosis. Loss to follow-up may also be differential and introduce bias for outcomes. Most of the participating clinicians were not surgeons, which limits the opportunity to study the impact of surgical interventions. Participants were geographically dispersed but relatively homogeneous with regard to socioeconomic status, which may limit the generalizability of current and future findings.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Multicenter studies are key to understanding the outcomes of subfertility treatments beyond IVF or IUI in broader populations, and the association of different prognostic factors with outcomes. We anticipate that the iNEST study will provide insight for clinical and treatment factors associated with outcomes of pregnancy and live birth, with appropriate attention to potential biases (including adjustment for potential confounders, multiple imputation for missing data, sensitivity analysis and inverse probability weighting for potential differential loss to follow-up, and assessments for clinical site heterogeneity). Future studies will need to either have: adequate funding to compensate clinics and participants for robust data collection, including targeted randomized trials; or a scaled-down, registry-based approach with targeted data points, similar to the multiple national and regional ART registries.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

Funding for the study came from the International Institute for Restorative Reproductive Medicine, the University of Utah, Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, Health Studies Fund, the Primary Children’s Medical Foundation, the Mary Cross Tippmann Foundation, the Atlas Foundation, the St. Augustine Foundation and the Women’s Reproductive Health Foundation. The authors declare no competing interests.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

The iNEST study is registered at clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01363596.

Successful pregnancy with restorative reproductive medicine after 16 years of infertility, three recurrent miscarriages, and eight unsuccessful embryo transfers with in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection: a case report

BACKGROUND

Restorative reproductive medicine represents a comprehensive approach to subfertility (infertility and miscarriage) with investigations, diagnoses, and treatments combined with fertility charting to restore optimal reproductive function. Restorative reproductive medicine assumes that multiple factors need to be identified and treated (cycle optimization) for up to 12 cycles to achieve a successful pregnancy. Conception can occur during normal intercourse without intrauterine insemination or in vitro fertilization.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 35-year-old Croatian female presented for fertility treatment in May 2019 with a previous diagnosis of polycystic ovaries, infertility of 16 years duration, and 8 unsuccessful embryo transfers with in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection. She was gravida 3 para 0, with 2 miscarriages after spontaneous conception at 5-6 weeks gestation in 2002 and 2004, followed by a miscarriage after in vitro fertilization at 12 weeks gestation in 2011. We initially found poor follicle function and suboptimal progesterone levels. Restorative reproductive medicine treatment resulted in conception after two cycles of treatment. This pregnancy ended in miscarriage at 7 weeks 4 days. Additional investigations found a balanced Robertsonian translocation (13, 14) and a uterine septum. We achieved repeat fertilization with restorative reproductive medicine after three cycles of treatment following resection of the uterine septum and ovulation induction with letrozole and human chorionic gonadotrophin. She had a full-term healthy pregnancy and live birth in 2021.

CONCLUSION

We propose that a full evaluation of underlying factors, and up to 12 cycles of cycle optimization, should be offered to subfertile patients before considering in vitro fertilization treatment.

Fertility Awareness-Based Methods for Women's Health and Family Planning

Background

Fertility awareness-based methods (FABMs) educate about reproductive health and enable tracking and interpretation of physical signs, such as cervical fluid secretions and basal body temperature, which reflect the hormonal changes women experience on a cyclical basis during the years of ovarian activity. Some methods measure relevant hormone levels directly. Most FABMs allow women to identify ovulation and track this "vital sign" of the menstrual or female reproductive cycle, through daily observations recorded on cycle charts (paper or electronic).

Applications

Physicians can use the information from FABM charts to guide the diagnosis and management of medical conditions and to support or restore healthy function of the reproductive and endocrine systems, using a restorative reproductive medical (RRM) approach. FABMs can also be used by couples to achieve or avoid pregnancy and may be most effective when taught by a trained instructor.

Challenges

Information about individual FABMs is rarely provided in medical education. Outdated information is widespread both in training programs and in the public sphere. Obtaining accurate information about FABMs is further complicated by the numerous period tracking or fertility apps available, because very few of these apps have evidence to support their effectiveness for identifying the fertile window, for achieving or preventing pregnancy.

Conclusions

This article provides an overview of different types of FABMs with a published evidence base, apps and resources for learning and using FABMs, the role FABMs can play in medical evaluation and management, and the effectiveness of FABMs for family planning, both to achieve or to avoid pregnancy.