Embryo donation: Survey of in-vitro fertilization (IVF) patients and randomized trial of complimentary counseling

Alison E Zimon, Donald S Shepard, Jeffrey Prottas, Kristin L Rooney, Jeanie Ungerleider, Yara A Halasa-Rappel, Denny Sakkas, Selwyn P Oskowitz, Alison E Zimon, Donald S Shepard, Jeffrey Prottas, Kristin L Rooney, Jeanie Ungerleider, Yara A Halasa-Rappel, Denny Sakkas, Selwyn P Oskowitz

Abstract

Design: This study surveyed patients with stored frozen embryos and developed and tested an intervention through a randomized trial to support subjects to consider embryo disposition options (EDOs), especially donation for family building.

Methods: Based on a review of literature on EDOs, the authors developed and mailed a 2-page anonymous survey to 1,053 patients in Massachusetts (USA) to elicit their feelings about their stored embryos. Target patients had embryos cryopreserved for ≥1 year and had not indicated an EDO. Survey respondents were next randomized between usual care (control arm) or an offer of complimentary counseling and educational support regarding EDOs. These counseling sessions were conducted by a licensed mental health professional specializing in infertility treatment.

Results: Despite telephone reminders, only 21.3% of patients responded, likely reflecting most patients' reluctance to address EDOs. Respondents endorsed an average of 2 of the 5 EDOs, with the following percentages supporting each option: store for future attempts (82%), continue storage (79%), donate to research (29%), discard (14%), and donate for family building (13%). When asked their opinions towards embryo donation to another couple, 78% of patients agreed that donation is a way to help another couple, 48% would consider embryo donation to another family if they had a better understanding of the process, and 38% would be willing to consider donation if they were not going to use the embryos themselves, but 73% expressed discomfort with donation. In the randomized trial, 7.8% of intervention subjects (n = 8) obtained counseling sessions compared to 0.0% (none) of usual care subjects (p = 0.0069). Counseling participants valued not only discussing EDOs, but also assistance in expressing their feelings and differences with their partners.

Conclusion: Improvement in counseling rates over the control arm suggests that free professional counseling is a small, but likely effective, step towards deciding on an EDO. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01883934 (Frozen embryo donation study).

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1. CONSORT patient flow diagram.
Fig 1. CONSORT patient flow diagram.

References

    1. Hoffman DI, Zellman GL, Fair CC, Mayer JF, Zeitz JG, Gibbons WE, et al. Cryopreserved embryos in the United States and their availability for research. Fertil Steril. 2003;79(5):1063–9. 10.1016/s0015-0282(03)00172-9 .
    1. Rienzi L, Gracia C, Maggiulli R, LaBarbera AR, Kaser DJ, Ubaldi FM, et al. Oocyte, embryo and blastocyst cryopreservation in ART: systematic review and meta-analysis comparing slow-freezing versus vitrification to produce evidence for the development of global guidance. Hum Reprod Update. 2017;23(2):139–55. 10.1093/humupd/dmw038 .
    1. Cattapan A, Doyle A. Patient decision-making about the disposition of surplus cryopreserved embryos in Canada. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2016;38(1):60–6. 10.1016/j.jogc.2015.11.007 .
    1. McMahon CA, Saunders DM. Attitudes of couples with stored frozen embryos toward conditional embryo donation. Fertil Steril. 2009;91(1):140–7. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.08.004 .
    1. American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM). Impacting Reproductive Care Worldwide 2019 [Cited 10 May 2019]. .
    1. Victoria Assisted Reproductive Treatment Authority (VARTA). Storage of your eggs, sperm & embryos in Victoria [Cited 13 Oct 2017]. .
    1. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA). Code of practice: Storage of gametes and embryos [Cited 13 Oct 2017]. ().
    1. Bankowski BJ, Lyerly AD, Faden RR, Wallach EE. The social implications of embryo cryopreservation. Fertil Steril. 2005;84(4):823–32. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.02.057 .
    1. Schmidt S. 2,000 frozen eggs and embryos possibly ‘compromised’ after fertility clinic temperature malfunction: The Washington Post; 2018 [Cited 10 Oct 2018]. .
    1. Reprotech Limited. Embryo Storage Costs 2019 [CIted 10 May 2019]. .
    1. Kawwass JF, Crawford S, Hipp HS, Boulet SL, Kissin DM, Jamieson DJ, et al. Embryo donation: National trends and outcomes, 2000 through 2013. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;215(6):747.e1–.e5. 10.1016/j.ajog.2016.06.050 .
    1. Office of Population Affairs. Embryo Adoption 2019 [23 July 2019]. .
    1. US Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Population Affairs. Embryo Adoption [Cited 11 Jun 2019]. .
    1. Hill GA, Freeman MR. Embryo disposition: choices made by patients and donor oocyte recipients. Fertil Steril. 2011;95(3):940–3. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.08.002 .
    1. Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Disposition of abandoned embryos: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2013;99:1848–9. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.02.024
    1. Wanggren K, Alden J, Bergh T, Skoog Svanberg A. Attitudes towards embryo donation among infertile couples with frozen embryos. Hum Reprod. 2013;28(9):2432–9. 10.1093/humrep/det252 .
    1. Wanggren K, Prag F, Skoog Svanberg A. Attitudes towards embryo donation in Swedish women and men of reproductive age. Ups J Med Sci. 2013;118(3):187–95. 10.3109/03009734.2013.808294
    1. Provoost V, Pennings G, De Sutter P, Dhont M. The frozen embryo and its nonresponding parents. Fertil Steril. 2011;95(6):1980–4. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.02.033 .
    1. Provoost V, Pennings G, De Sutter P, Dhont M. "Something of the two of us." The emotionally loaded embryo disposition decision making of patients who view their embryo as a symbol of their relationship. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2012;33(2):45–52. 10.3109/0167482X.2012.676111
    1. Provoost V, Pennings G, De Sutter P, Van de Velde A, Dhont M. Trends in embryo disposition decisions: patients’ responses to a 15-year mailing program. Hum Reprod. 2012;27(2):506–14. 10.1093/humrep/der419
    1. Provoost V, Pennings G, De Sutter P, Dhont M. A private matter: how patients decide what to do with cryopreserved embryos after infertility treatment. Hum Fertil. 2012;15(4):210–6.
    1. Jin X, Wang G, Liu S, Liu M, Zhang J, Shi Y. Patients’ attitudes towards the surplus frozen embryos in China. Biomed Res Int. 2013;2013:934567 10.1155/2013/934567
    1. Lanzendorf S, Ratts V, Keller S, Odem R. Disposition of cryopreserved embryos by infertility patients desiring to discontinue storage. Fertil Steril. 2010;93(2):486–9. Epub 2009/04/03. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.02.001 .
    1. Lyerly AD, Steinhauser K, Voils C, Namey E, Alexander C, Bankowski B, et al. Fertility patients’ views about frozen embryo disposition: results of a multi-institutional U.S. survey. Fertil Steril. 2010;93(2):499–509. Epub 2008/12/09. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.10.015
    1. Bruno C, Dudkiewicz-Sibony C, Berthaut I, Weil E, Brunet L, Fortier C, et al. Survey of 243 ART patients having made a final disposition decision about their surplus cryopreserved embryos: the crucial role of symbolic embryo representation. Hum Reprod. 2016;31(7):1508–14. 10.1093/humrep/dew104 .
    1. Raz A, Amer-Alshiek J, Goren-Margalit M, Jacobi G, Hochberg A, Amit A, et al. Donation of surplus frozen pre-embryos to research in Israel: underlying motivations. Isr J Health Policy Res. 2016;5:25 10.1186/s13584-016-0085-4
    1. Samorinha C, Severo M, Alves E, Machado H, Figueiredo B, Silva S. Factors associated with willingness to donate embryos for research among couples undergoing IVF. Reprod Biomed Online. 2016;32(2):247–56. 10.1016/j.rbmo.2015.11.018 .
    1. Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 190th General Court. Section 47H: infertility, pregnancy-related benefits 2018 [Cited 20 August 2018]. .
    1. Likert R. A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Arch Psychol. 1932;140:1–55.
    1. Glaser B, Strauss A. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine; 1967.
    1. Social Science Statistics. Easy Fischer Exact Test Calculator 2017 [Cited 11 Dec 2017]. .
    1. Vassar Stats. The confidence interval of a proportion [Cited 25 Apr 2018]. .
    1. Wilson EB. Probable inference, the law of succession, and statistical inference. J Am Stat Assoc. 1927;22:209–12. 10.2307/2276774
    1. Deniz SG, Hughes EG, Neal MS, Faghih M, Amin S, Karnis MF. Are health care providers adequately educating couples for embryo disposition decisions? Fertil Steril. 2016;105(3):684–9. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.11.025 .
    1. Nachtigall RD, Mac Dougall K, Lee M, Harrington J, Becker G. What do patients want? Expectations and perceptions of IVF clinic information and support regarding frozen embryo disposition. Fertil Steril. 2010;94(6):2069–72. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.02.023
    1. Millbank J, Stuhmcke A, Karpin I. Embryo donation and understanding of kinship: The impact of law and policy. Hum Reprod. 2017;32(1):133–8. 10.1093/humrep/dew297
    1. Kovacs GT, Breheny SA, Dear MJ. Embryo donation at an Australian university in-vitro fertilisation clinic: issues and outcomes. Med J Aust. 2003;178(3):127–9. .
    1. Chambers GM, Hoang VP, Sullivan EA, Chapman MG, Ishihara O, Zegers-Hochschild F, et al. The impact of consumer affordability on access to assisted reproductive technologies and embryo transfer practices: an international analysis. Fertil Steril. 2014;101(1):191–8. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.09.005

Source: PubMed

Sponsorzy i współpracownicy

Warunki medyczne

Interwencje lekowe

3
Subskrybuj