Patient-centred quality of care in an IVF programme evaluated by men and women

Holter, Herborg; Sandin‐Bojö, Ann‐Kristin; Gejervall, Ann-Louise; Wikland, Matts; Wilde‐Larsson, Bodil; Bergh, Christina

doi:10.1093/humrep/deu254

Cited by 17 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The average age of the participants in the present study was 37.9 years, which is higher than the average ages of the participants in other studies; namely, 35.0 years (Huppelschoten et al, 2013), 36.6 years (Holter et al, 2014), and 34.9 years (Lopes, Canavarro, Verhaak, Boivin, & Gameiro, 2014). This might be related to the larger number of specialized infertility facilities and more treatments in Japan than in other countries (Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2016), as well as the availability of ART that can be attempted without limit.…”

Section: Participants' Characteristicscontrasting

confidence: 79%

“…The questionnaire return rate was 80.8%. This rate was higher than for those in other countries in terms of a questionnaire survey for infertile men as follows: 60.6% (Holter et al, 2014), 75.5% (Santoro et al, 2016), and 41% (Huppelschoten et al, 2013). The high questionnaire return rate in the present study was apparently related to the adequate and direct explanation of the research purpose to the participants by the researchers and the personal request for their cooperation.…”

Section: Participants' Characteristicscontrasting

confidence: 73%

“…The male factor infertility rate in the present study was 10.3%. This was previously reported as 31.1% (Holter et al, 2014). Earlier, Aarts et al (2011) found that 27% of infertility cases was related to a male factor.…”

Section: Participants' Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 72%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Quality‐of‐life predictors for men undergoing infertility treatment in Japan

Asazawa

Jitsuzaki

Mori

et al. 2018

Japan Journal Nursing Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim To dentify the predictors of the quality of life (QOL) of infertile men who are undergoing infertility treatments in Japan and to create a QOL prediction model, with the main variables aimed at providing more adequate support to male patients. Methods This cross‐sectional study used the quantitative data that were collected from 321 returned self‐report questionnaires that had been distributed to the men of 411 couples who were undergoing fertility treatment. The following four scales were used to measure the main outcomes: FertiQoL, psychological distress, spousal support, and workplace support. The data were analyzed by descriptive statistics, multiple regression analyses, and structural equation modeling. Results The number of returned questionnaires was 321 (78.1%). The QOL that was measured by FertiQoL was significantly lower in those men who were diagnosed with male factor infertility than in the other male patients. The two significant predictors of QOL were: spousal support and the infertility period. The structural equation modeling revealed that the same factors were related to QOL. Conclusions Male factor infertility, less spousal support, and a longer period of infertility were associated with a poorer QOL of those men who were undergoing infertility treatment. These results suggest that focusing on infertility causes, the length of the infertility period, and the couples’ partnership during treatment is needed to provide full support to men who have been diagnosed with infertility.

show abstract

Section: Participants' Characteristicscontrasting

confidence: 79%

Section: Participants' Characteristicscontrasting

confidence: 73%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Quality‐of‐life predictors for men undergoing infertility treatment in Japan

Asazawa

Jitsuzaki

Mori

et al. 2018

Japan Journal Nursing Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Partners in a couple are not independent of each other and could probably influence each other's ratings. In a previous study investigating patient‐centered quality of care by the use of the QPP‐IVF, no significant difference was found between the individual and couple based analysis of the responses . In this study no couple‐based analysis was performed because the main point was to explore the difference between professionals and patients, not between men and women.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…The instrument QPP‐IVF was developed and validated specifically for evaluating patients’ experiences of quality of care in conjunction with IVF treatments . The instrument is based on the theoretical foundation of the validated general instrument, QPP, which has its origin in in‐depth interviews with patients .…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

In vitro fertilization healthcare professionals generally underestimate patients’ satisfaction with quality of care

Holter

Gejervall

Borg³

et al. 2017

Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Personalized ovarian stimulation for assisted reproductive technology: study design considerations to move from hype to added value for patients

Mol

Bossuyt

Sunkara

et al. 2018

Fertility and Sterility

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although most medical treatments are designed for the average patient with a one-size-fits-all-approach, they may not benefit all. Better understanding of the function of genes, proteins, and metabolite, and of personal and environmental factors has led to a call for personalized medicine. Personalized reproductive medicine is still in its infancy, without clear guidance on treatment aspects that could be personalized and on trial design to evaluate personalized treatment effect and benefit-harm balance. While the rationale for a personalized approach often relies on retrospective analyses of large observational studies or real-world data, solid evidence of superiority of a personalized approach will come from randomized trials comparing outcomes and safety between a personalized and one-size-fits-all strategy. A more efficient, targeted randomized trial design may recruit only patients or couples for which the personalized approach would differ from the previous, standard approach. Multiple monocenter studies using the same study protocol (allowing future meta-analysis) might reduce the major center effect associated with multicenter studies. In certain cases, single-arm observational studies can generate the necessary evidence for a personalized approach. This review describes each of the main segments of patient care in assisted reproductive technologies treatment, addressing which aspects could be personalized, emphasizing current evidence and relevant study design.

show abstract

Patient-centred quality of care in an IVF programme evaluated by men and women

Abstract: The study was supported by the LUA/ALF agreement at Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden, and by Hjalmar Svensson's Research Foundation. None of the authors declared any conflict of interests.

Cited by 17 publications

References 45 publications

Quality‐of‐life predictors for men undergoing infertility treatment in Japan

Quality‐of‐life predictors for men undergoing infertility treatment in Japan

In vitro fertilization healthcare professionals generally underestimate patients’ satisfaction with quality of care

Personalized ovarian stimulation for assisted reproductive technology: study design considerations to move from hype to added value for patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About