Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Differences in female and male perception of information and decision-making in single-embryo transfer in in vitro fertilization in Sweden

  • Assisted Reproduction
  • Published:
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to evaluate the information and the factors that contribute to the decision to accept and choose single embryo transfer (SET) in females and males.

Materials and methods

Fifty-four females and males undergoing SET were interviewed separately using a structured questionnaire.

Results

The women were significantly more satisfied with the information than the men (odds ratio 3.3), but the decision to accept SET was nevertheless more difficult for women (OR 3.1). Only one-third of both female and males were aware of the increased maternal risks with twin pregnancies. There was a tendency that the women who accepted SET had previous children, shorter duration of infertility, and were younger. Cryopreservation of embryos and a good pregnancy chance were important irrespective of gender.

Conclusion

The female needs more support to choose SET. The male needs better information and further involvement in decision-making. The females were more aware of the fetal risks, but the awareness of the increased maternal risks with twin pregnancies was low.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ericson A, Nygren KG, Olausson PO, Källen B. Hospital care utilization of infants born after IVF. Hum Reprod 2002;17:929–32.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Bergh T, Ericson A, Hillensjö T, Nygren KG, Wennerholm U-B. Deliveries and children born after in-vitro fertilization in Sweden 1982–95: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet 1999;354:1579–85.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Duckitt K, Harrington D. Risk factors for pre-eclampsia at antenatal booking: systematic review of controlled studies. BMJ 2005;330:549–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Hamberger L, Hazekamp J. Towards single embryo transfer in IVF. J Reprod Immunol 2002;55:141–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Guerra D, Llobera A, Veiga A, Barri PN. Psychiatric morbidity in couples attending a fertility service. Hum Reprod 1998;13:1733–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Eugster A, Vingerhoets AJJM. Psychological aspects of in vitro fertilization: a review. Soc Sci Med 1999;48:575–89.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Golombok S. Psychological functioning in infertility patients. Hum Reprod 1992;7:208–12.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Newton CR, Hearn MT, Yuspee AA. Psycological assessment and follow-up after in-vitro fertilization: assessing the impact of failure. Fertil Steril 1990;54:879–86.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Edelman RJ, Connoly KJ, Bartlett H. Coping strategies and psychological adjustment of couples presenting for IVF. J Psychosom Res 1994;38:355–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Freeman EW, Boxer AS, Rickels K, Tureck R, Mastrioianni L. Psychological evaluation and support in a program of in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer. Fertil Steril 1985;43:48–53.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Goldfarb J, Kinzer DJ, Boyle M, Kurit D. Attitudes of in vitro fertilization and intrauterine insemination couples toward multiple pregnancy and multifetal pregnancy reduction. Fert Ster 1996;65:815–20.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Grobman WA, Milad MP, Stout J, Klock SC. Patient perceptions of multiple gestations: an assessment of knowledge and risk aversion. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001;185:920–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Pinborg A, Loft A, Schmidt L, Nyboe Andersen A. Attitudes of IVF/ICSI-twin mothers towards twins and single embryo transfer. Hum Reprod 2003;18:621–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Frank DI. Gender differences in decision making about infertility treatment. Appl Nurs Res 1990;3:56–62.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Brody DS, Miller SM, Lerman CE, Smith DG, Lazaro CG, Blum MJ. The relationship between patient’s satisfaction with their physicians and perceptions about interventions they desired and received. Med Care 1989;27:1027–35.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Greenfield S, Kaplan S, Ware Jr JE. Expanding patient involvement in care. Effects on patient outcomes. Ann Int Med 1985;102:520–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Deber RB. Physicians in health care management: the patient–physician partnership: decision making, problem solving and the desire to participate. Can Med Assoc J 1984;151:423–7.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Health Services Group. Studying patient’s preference in health care decision making. Can Med Assoc J 1992;147:859–64.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Connolly KJ, Edelmann RJ, Bartlett H, Cooke ID, Lenton E, Pike S. An evaluation of counseling for couples undergoing treatment for in-vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod 1986;8:1332–8.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Slade P, Emery J, Lieberman BA. A prospective, longitudinal study of emotions and relationships in in-vitro-fertilization treatment. Hum Reprod 1997;12:183–90.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Wirtberg I. His and her childlessness. Thesis 1992, Department of Psychiatry and Psychology. Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.

  22. Hjelmstedt A, Andersson L, Skoog-Svanberg A, Bergh T, Boivin J, Collins A. Gender differences in psychological reactions to infertility among couples seeking IVF- and ICSI-treatment. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1999;78:42–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Laffont I, Edelmann RJ. Psychological aspects of in vitro fertilization: a gender comparison. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol 1994;15:85–92.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Nachtigall RD, Becker G, Vozny M. The effect of gender-specific diagnosis on men’s and women’s responses to infertility. Fertil Steril 1992;57:113–21.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Schmidt L. Infertile couples assessment of infertility treatment. Acta Obstet Gynaecol Scand 1998;77:649–53.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Halman LJ, Andrews FM, Abbey A. Gender differences and perceptions about childbearing among infertile couples. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs 1994;23:593–600.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Fekkes M, Buitendijk SE, Verrips GHW, Braat DDM, Brewaeys AMA, Dolfing JG, et al. Health-related quality of life in relation to gender and age in couples planning IVF treatment. Hum Reprod 2003;18:1536–43.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Boivin J, Andersson L, Skoog-Svanberg A, Hjelmstedt A, Collins A, Bergh T. Psychological reactions during in-vitro fertilization: similar response patterns in husbands and wives. Hum Reprod 1998;13:3262–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Lalos A. Psycological and social aspects of tubal infertility. A longitudinal study of infertile women and their men. Thesis 1985, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.

  30. Möller A. Psychological aspects of infertility (Swedish). Thesis 1985, Göteborg University, Göteborg, Sweden.

  31. Glover L, Gannon K, Sherr L, Abel PD. Male subfertility clinic attenders’ expectations of medical consultation. Br J Clin Psychol 1996;35:531–42.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Schmidt L, Holstein BE, Boivin J, Sångren H, Tjörnhöj-Thomsen T, Blaabjerg J, et al. Patients’ attitudes to medical and psychosocial aspects of care in fertility clinics: findings from the Copenhagen multi-centre psychosocial infertility (COMPI) research programme. Hum Reprod 2003;18:628–37.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. In Vitro Fertilization Unit, Falun Hospital, S-79182, Falun, Sweden

    M. Blennborn & S. Nilsson

  2. Centre for Clinical Research Dalarna, Falun Hospital, Falun, Sweden

    D. Hellberg & S. Nilsson

  3. Department of Women’s and Children’s Health, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden

    D. Hellberg & S. Nilsson

Authors
  1. M. Blennborn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. D. Hellberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. S. Nilsson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. Blennborn.

Additional information

The female need more support to accept and choose single embryo transfer, compared to the male and information should in some areas be directed differently to females and males.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Blennborn, M., Hellberg, D. & Nilsson, S. Differences in female and male perception of information and decision-making in single-embryo transfer in in vitro fertilization in Sweden. J Assist Reprod Genet 24, 337–342 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-007-9132-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-007-9132-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation