Dataset Information

Pre-Conception Interventions for Subfertile Couples Undergoing Assisted Reproductive Technology Treatment: Modeling Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Approximately 1 in 7 couples experience subfertility, many of whom have lifestyles that negatively affect fertility, such as poor nutrition, low physical activity, obesity, smoking, or alcohol consumption. Reducing lifestyle risk factors prior to pregnancy or assisted reproductive technology treatment contributes to the improvement of reproductive health, but cost-implications are unknown.

Objective

The goal of this study was to evaluate reproductive, maternal pregnancy, and birth outcomes, as well as the costs of pre-conception lifestyle intervention programs in subfertile couples and obese women undergoing assisted reproductive technology.

Methods

Using a hypothetical model based on quantitative parameters from published literature and expert opinion, we evaluated the following lifestyle intervention programs: (1) Smarter Pregnancy, an online tool; (2) LIFEstyle, which provides outpatient support for obese women; (3) concurrent use of both Smarter Pregnancy and LIFEstyle for obese women; (4) smoking cessation in men; and (5) a mindfulness mental health support program using group therapy sessions. The model population was based on data from the Netherlands.

Results

All model-based analyses of the lifestyle interventions showed a reduction in the number of in vitro fertilization, intracytoplasmic sperm injection, or intrauterine insemination treatments required to achieve pregnancy and successful birth for couples in the Netherlands. Smarter Pregnancy was modeled to have the largest increase in spontaneous pregnancy rate (13.0%) and the largest absolute reduction in potential assisted reproductive technology treatments. Among obese subfertile women, LIFEstyle was modeled to show a reduction in the occurrence of gestational diabetes, maternal hypertensive pregnancy complications, and preterm births by 4.4%, 3.8%, and 3.0%, respectively, per couple. Modeled cost savings per couple per year were €41 (US $48.66), €360 (US $427.23), €513 (US $608.80), €586 (US $695.43), and €1163 (US $1380.18) for smoking cessation, mindfulness, Smarter Pregnancy, combined Smarter Pregnancy AND LIFEstyle, and LIFEstyle interventions, respectively.

Conclusions

Although we modeled the potential impact on reproductive outcomes and costs of fertility treatment rather than collecting real-world data, our model suggests that of the lifestyle interventions for encouraging healthier behaviors, all are likely to be cost effective and appear to have positive effects on reproductive, maternal pregnancy, and birth outcomes. Further real-world data are required to determine the cost-effectiveness of pre-conception lifestyle interventions, including mobile apps and web-based tools that help improve lifestyle, and their effects on reproductive health. We believe that further implementation of the lifestyle app Smarter Pregnancy designed for subfertile couples seeking assistance to become pregnant is likely to be cost-effective and would allow reproductive health outcomes to be collected.

SUBMITTER: Steegers-Theunissen R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7721553 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Pre-Conception Interventions for Subfertile Couples Undergoing Assisted Reproductive Technology Treatment: Modeling Analysis.

Steegers-Theunissen Régine R Hoek Annemieke A Groen Henk H Bos Annelies A van den Dool Grada G Schoonenberg Marieke M Smeenk Jesper J Creutzberg Eva E Vecht Loes L Starmans Luc L Laven Joop J

JMIR mHealth and uHealth 20201123 11

<h4>Background</h4>Approximately 1 in 7 couples experience subfertility, many of whom have lifestyles that negatively affect fertility, such as poor nutrition, low physical activity, obesity, smoking, or alcohol consumption. Reducing lifestyle risk factors prior to pregnancy or assisted reproductive technology treatment contributes to the improvement of reproductive health, but cost-implications are unknown.<h4>Objective</h4>The goal of this study was to evaluate reproductive, maternal pregnancy ...[more]

PMID: 33226349

Similar Datasets

Project description:Study questionWhat are the experiences and the support and sexual advice needs of subfertile couples continuing to attempt natural conception after the diagnostic fertility work-up?Summary answerExploration of the experiences of couples showed that couples would have appreciated fertility clinic staff embedding expectant management into the fertility clinic trajectory, supportive staff with female and male patient interactions and advice on common experiences of peers and on managing their lifestyle, distress and subfertility-related sexual challenges.What is known alreadyDutch and British professional guidelines advise newly diagnosed subfertile couples with a 'good prognosis' to continue to attempt natural conception and do not require fertility clinic staff to interact with patients. Fertility clinic staff and subfertile couples struggle to follow these guidelines as they feel an urgent need for action. Subfertile couples might benefit from sexual advice, as subfertility is negatively associated with sexual functioning, which is important for natural conception.Study design size durationTwelve one-time in-depth interviews (2015-2017) were conducted with 10 heterosexual couples and 2 women whose partners did not participate, then the interviews were subjected to inductive content analysis, reaching inductive thematic saturation.Participants/materials setting methodsThe 22 interviewees had experienced 3-18 months of expectant management after their diagnostic fertility work-up in a Belgian or a Dutch tertiary fertility clinic. The face-to-face in-depth interviews explored positive and negative experiences and unmet needs. The transcribed interviews were subjected to inductive content analysis, by two researchers discussing initial disagreements.Main results and the role of chanceCouples would appreciate fertility clinic staff embedding expectant management in the fertility clinic trajectory, by starting off with reassuring couples that their very thorough diagnostic fertility work-up demonstrated their good chance of natural conception, and by involving couples in deciding on the duration of expectant management and by planning the follow-up appointment after expectant management up front. Couples had encountered sexual challenges during expectant management and had an interest in sexual advice, focused on increasing pleasure and partner bonding and preventing the rise of dysfunctions. The couples agreed that a (secured) website with evidence-based, non-patronizing text and mixed media would be an appropriate format for a novel support programme. Couples were keen for interactions with fertility clinic staff which addressed both partners of subfertile couples. Couples also valued advice on managing their lifestyle and distress and would have liked information on the experiences of their peers.Limitations reasons for cautionRecall bias is plausible given the retrospective nature of this study. This explorative interview study was not designed for examining country or gender differences in experiences and needs but it did generate new findings on inter-country differences.Wider implications of the findingsRather than simply advising expectant management, fertility clinics are encouraged to offer couples who continue to attempt natural conception after their diagnostic fertility work-up, supportive patient-staff interactions with advice on common experiences of peers and on managing their lifestyle, distress and sexual challenges related to subfertility.Study funding/competing interestsFunded by Flanders Research Foundation and the University of Amsterdam. There are no competing interests.Trial registration numberN/A.

Project description:ObjectiveTo investigate hospitalizations up to 8 years after live birth among women who used assisted reproductive technology (ART) or who were subfertile compared with women who conceived naturally.DesignRetrospective cohort.SettingDeliveries among privately insured women aged ≥18 years between 2004 and 2017 from Massachusetts state vital records were linked to the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcome Reporting System and hospital observational/inpatient stays.Patient(s)We compared patients with ART, medically assisted reproduction (MAR), and unassisted subfertile (USF) delivery with those with fertile delivery.Intervention(s)NA.Main outcome measure(s)Postdelivery hospitalization information was derived from the International Classification of Diseases codes for discharges and combined by type. The relative risks and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of hospitalization for up to the first 8 years postdelivery were modeled.Result(s)Among 492,515 deliveries, 5.6% used ART, 1.6% used MAR, and 1.8% were USF. Compared with fertile deliveries, deliveries that used ART or MAR or were USF were more likely to have hospital utilization (inpatient or observational stay) for any reason for up to 8 years of follow-up (USF, adjusted relative risk [aRR], 1.18 [95% CI, 1.12-1.25]; MAR, aRR, 1.20 [1.13-1.27]; and ART, aRR, 1.29 [1.25-1.34]). Assisted reproductive technology deliveries had an increased risk of hospitalization for conditions of the cardiovascular system (aRR, 1.31 [95% CI, 1.20-1.41]), overweight/obesity (aRR, 1.30 [1.17-1.44]), diabetes (aRR, 1.25 [1.05-1.49]), reproductive tract (aRR, 1.62 [1.47-1.79]), digestive tract (aRR, 1.39 [1.30-1.49]), thyroid (aRR, 2.02 [1.80-2.26]), respiratory system (aRR, 1.13 [1.03-1.24]), and cancer (aRR, 1.40 [1.18-1.65]) up to 8 years after delivery. Deliveries with MAR and subfertility had similar patterns of hospitalization as ART deliveries.Conclusion(s)Women who conceived through fertility treatment or experienced subfertility were at increased risk of subsequent hospitalization resulting from a variety of chronic and acute conditions.

Project description:ImportanceNumerous studies have documented the association of self-rated health (SRH) with chronic diseases. However, few studies have investigated its association with semen quality.ObjectiveTo examine the association of SRH with semen quality among men undergoing assisted reproductive technology (ART) in China.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study recruited male partners in couples undergoing ART treatment at the Center for Reproductive Medicine, Tongji Hospital, Wuhan, China. A total of 1262 men underwent 2 semen examinations and completed a questionnaire on SRH between December 2018 and January 2020. Data analysis was performed from November 20, 2022, to March 24, 2023.ExposureSRH, including overall physical and mental health, as well as reproductive-related physical and mental health specifically, were reported at baseline recruitment.Main outcomes and measuresSperm concentration, sperm progressive motility, sperm motility, and sperm count as semen quality parameters.ResultsThe study included 1262 men with a mean (SD) age of 32.79 (5.25) years and body mass index of 24.37 (3.68). Men with poorer SRH had lower semen quality (eg, sperm concentration among poor vs very good overall physical health: percentage variation, -14.67%; 95% CI, -23.62% to -4.66%). Among 4 components of SRH, a greater reduction in semen quality was estimated for reproductive-related SRH compared with overall SRH, whereas the greatest reduction was observed for reproductive-related physical SRH. In comparison with men with very good reproductive-related physical SRH, men with poor reproductive-related physical SRH had differences of -24.78% (95% CI, -32.71% to -15.93%) and -25.61% (95% CI, -33.95% to -16.22%) in sperm count and concentration, respectively, and regression coefficients of -9.38 (95% CI, -12.01 to -6.76) and -9.24 (95% CI, -11.82 to -6.66) for sperm motility and sperm progressive motility, respectively.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study of Chinese men, poorer SRH was associated with lower semen quality, and reproductive-related physical SRH was the most pronounced indicator. Our findings suggest that SRH, especially reproductive-related physical SRH, was a good indicator of semen quality, which should inform public and clinical regulatory decisions.

Project description:BackgroundLive birth has increasingly been identified as the standard clinical approach to measure the success of medically assisted reproduction (MAR). However, previous analyses comparing biosimilar preparations of follitropin alfa versus the reference product (GONAL-f®, Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany or GONAL-f® RFF; EMD Serono, Inc., Rockland, MA), have had insufficient power to detect differences in clinically meaningful outcomes such as live birth.MethodsMedline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science and clinical trial registries were searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and conference abstracts comparing biosimilar follitropin alfa versus the reference product in controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) cycles published before 31 October 2020. Only studies in humans and publications in English were included. Retrieved studies were screened independently by two authors based on titles and abstracts, and then by full text.Inclusion criteriaRCTs comparing follitropin alfa biosimilar preparations with the reference product in infertile patients of any age, with any type of infertility for any duration, undergoing COS for the purposes of MAR treatment (including frozen cycles). The primary outcome was live birth. Combined data for biosimilar preparations were analysed using a fixed-effects model.ResultsFrom 292 unique records identified, 17 studies were included in the systematic review, representing five unique RCTs that were included in the meta-analysis. Rates of live birth (RR = 0.83, 95% CI 0.71, 0.97; 4 RCTs, n = 1881, I2 = 0%), clinical pregnancy (RR = 0.82, 95% CI 0.72, 0.94; 4 RCTs, n = 2222, I2 = 0%) and ongoing pregnancy (RR = 0.81, 95% CI 0.68, 0.96; 4 RCTs, n = 1232, I2 = 0%) were significantly lower with biosimilar preparations versus the reference product. Rates of cumulative live birth and cumulative clinical pregnancy were also significantly lower with biosimilars versus the reference product. There was high risk of publication bias.ConclusionsThis meta-analysis included data from RCTs evaluating the efficacy and safety of the biosimilar follitropin alfa preparations and demonstrated lower probability of live birth and pregnancy (ongoing and clinical) in couples treated with biosimilar preparations compared with the reference product. This study provides more insight into the differences between biosimilar r-hFSH preparations and the reference product than previously reported.Trial registrationRegistration number: CRD42019121992 .

Dataset Information

Pre-Conception Interventions for Subfertile Couples Undergoing Assisted Reproductive Technology Treatment: Modeling Analysis.

Background

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Pre-Conception Interventions for Subfertile Couples Undergoing Assisted Reproductive Technology Treatment: Modeling Analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets