Comparative Evaluation of Patient Satisfaction in Natural and Programmed IVF Cycles: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: While in vitro fertilization (IVF) outcomes are traditionally assessed using biological and clinical indicators, patient satisfaction is increasingly recognized as a key component of quality, patient-centered fertility care. Differences in treatment burden and experience between natural and hormonally programmed IVF cycles may influence patient perceptions and acceptance of care.
Objective: To compare patient satisfaction between natural IVF cycles and combined oral contraceptive pill (OCP) programmed IVF cycles in a randomized clinical trial.
Methods: This single-center, open-label randomized controlled trial enrolled 86 women undergoing IVF at a tertiary fertility center in Nigeria. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either a natural cycle IVF group (n = 43) or an OCP-programmed cycle IVF group (n = 43). Both groups underwent controlled ovarian stimulation using a standardized short GnRH agonist protocol. Patient satisfaction with ovarian stimulation was assessed at the end of the treatment cycle using a structured Likert-scale questionnaire. Data were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis, with statistical significance set at p < 0.05.
Results: The mean satisfaction score was slightly higher in the OCP-programmed group compared with the natural cycle group (2.02 ± 0.83 vs. 1.79 ± 0.94); however, this difference was not statistically significant (t = −1.216, p = 0.228). Overall, participants in both groups reported favorable satisfaction levels with ovarian stimulation. Sociodemographic variables, including ethnicity and religion, were comparable between groups, although differences were observed in occupation and marital status.
Conclusion: Patient satisfaction with ovarian stimulation is comparable between natural and OCP-programmed IVF cycles. These findings support the use of either approach based on clinical indications, logistical considerations, and patient preference, without concern for reduced patient satisfaction
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
I. World Health Organization. Infertility definitions and terminology. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2020.
II. Niederberger C, Pellicer A, Cohen J, Gardner DK, Palermo GD, O’Neill CL, et al. Forty years of IVF. Fertility and Sterility. 2018;110(2):185–324.
III. Dancet EA, Nelen WL, Sermeus W, De Leeuw L, Kremer JA, D’Hooghe TM. Patient-centered infertility care: a systematic review of quantitative studies. Human Reproduction. 2010;25(4):994–1007.
IV. Greil AL, Slauson-Blevins K, McQuillan J. The experience of infertility: a review of recent literature. Sociology of Health & Illness. 2010;32(1):140–162.
V. Gameiro S, Boivin J, Peronace L, Verhaak CM. Why do patients discontinue fertility treatment? A systematic review of reasons and predictors of discontinuation in fertility treatment. Human Reproduction Update. 2012;18(6):652–669.
VI. van Empel IWH, Nelen WL, Tepe ET, van Laarhoven EA, Verhaak CM, Kremer JA. Measuring patient-centredness in infertility care: development of a patient-centredness questionnaire. Human Reproduction. 2010;25(2):251–259.
VII. Macklon NS, Fauser BCJM. Regulation of follicle development and novel approaches to ovarian stimulation for IVF. Human Reproduction Update. 2000;6(4):307–312.
VIII. Pelinck MJ, Hoek A, Simons AH, Heineman MJ. Efficacy of natural cycle IVF: a review of the literature. Human Reproduction Update. 2002;8(2):129–139.
IX. Groenewoud ER, Cantineau AEP, Kollen BJ, Macklon NS, Cohlen BJ. What is the optimal means of patient-friendly assisted reproductive techniques? A systematic review of the literature. Reproductive BioMedicine Online. 2012;24(5):523–532.
X. Nargund G, Fauser BCJM, Macklon NS, Ombelet W, Nygren K, Frydman R. The ISMAAR proposal on terminology for ovarian stimulation for IVF. Human Fertility (Cambridge). 2001;4(3):172–178.
XI. Al-Inany HG, Youssef MA, Ayeleke RO, Brown J, Lam WS, Broekmans FJ. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonists for assisted reproductive technology. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2016;4:CD001750.
XII. Humaidan P, Quartarolo J, Papanikolaou EG. Preventing ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome: guidance for the clinician. Reproductive BioMedicine Online. 2010;21(1):1–16.
XIII. Mourad S, Brown J, Farquhar C. Interventions for the prevention of OHSS in assisted reproduction. Human Reproduction. 2017;32(5):1022–1030.
XIV. Boivin J, Takefman JE, Braverman A. The fertility quality of life (FertiQoL) tool: development and general psychometric properties. Human Reproduction. 2001;16(4):865–873.
XV. Dancet EAF, Van Empel IWH, Rober P, Nelen WLDM, Kremer JAM, D’Hooghe TM. Patient-centred infertility care: a qualitative study to listen to the patient voice. Human Reproduction. 2013;28(2):354–361.
XVI. Smeenk JM, Verhaak CM, Eugster A, van Minnen A, Zielhuis GA, Braat DD. The effect of anxiety and depression on the outcome of in-vitro fertilization. Human Reproduction. 2004;19(3):563–568.
XVII. Pedro J, Brandão T, Schmidt L, Costa ME, Martins MV. Psychological burden of infertility and assisted reproductive treatment. Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2019;31(3):161–167.
XVIII. Ombelet W, Cooke I, Dyer S, Serour G, Devroey P. In vitro fertilization in low-resource countries: the challenges, solutions and controversies. Human Reproduction. 2008;23(9):2032–2037.
XIX. Institute of Medicine. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington DC: National Academies Press; 2001.
XX. Boivin J, Takefman JE, Braverman A. The fertility quality of life (FertiQoL) tool: development and validation. Hum Reprod. 2011;26(8):2084–2091.
XXI. Gameiro S, Verhaak CM, Lintsen AM. Women’s well-being and quality of life in relation to fertility treatment: a systematic review. Hum Reprod Update. 2012;18(6):599–615.
XXII. van Wely M, Kwan I, Mol BW. Scheduled versus spontaneous start of ovarian stimulation for IVF. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;CD010680.
XXIII. Boivin J, Griffiths E, Venetis CA. Emotional distress in infertile women and failure of assisted reproductive technologies: meta-analysis of prospective psychosocial studies. BMJ. 2011;342:d223.
XXIV. Chen TH, Liao WC, Wang TY. Patient-reported outcomes of IVF: stress, satisfaction, and adherence in women undergoing controlled ovarian stimulation. Fertil Steril. 2013;99(1):105–111.
XXV. van den Akker OB, Mulders AG, Nelen WL. Improving patient-centered care in IVF: effect of counseling and education on satisfaction and treatment adherence. Hum Reprod. 2012;27(9):2697–2706.