A randomized comparison of alternative methods of information provision on the acceptability of elective single embryo transfer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

90 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of alternative ways of providing information about the risks of twins on couples' perceptions about elective single embryo transfer (eSET). METHODS: Couples undergoing IVF were randomized into three groups. Group 1 received a standard information pack, group 2 an extra information leaflet about twin pregnancy, and group 3 an additional discussion session. The primary outcome measure was acceptability of a hypothetical policy of eSET. Data were collected by means of a questionnaire. RESULTS: eSET was acceptable to 17 (27%), 20 (30%) and 24 (32%) couples in groups 1, 2 and 3, if it meant a slight reduction in pregnancy rates, and to 51 (82%), 55 (83%) and 53 (87%) couples, respectively, if pregnancy rates were unchanged. A fixed charge for all fresh and frozen embryo transfers following a single oocyte retrieval led to acceptability rates of 35 (57%), 36 (55%) and 38 (65%). CONCLUSIONS: Additional information, involving an extra information leaflet and face to face discussion, did not changes couples' attitudes towards eSET. Maintaining existing rates of pregnancy and offering a fixed charge for all embryo transfers resulting from an oocyte recovery may encourage more couples to consider eSET.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)911-916
Number of pages5
JournalHuman Reproduction
Volume19
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Apr 2004

Keywords

  • IVF
  • patient information
  • provision of information
  • randomized controlled trial
  • single embryo transfer
  • IN-VITRO FERTILIZATION
  • MULTIPLE BIRTHS
  • ASSISTED REPRODUCTION
  • CONTROLLED-TRIAL
  • PREGNANCIES
  • ATTITUDES
  • HEALTH
  • IVF/ICSI
  • COUPLES
  • COSTS

Cite this