Physicians and patients’ motivations to perform elective single or double-embryo transfers: A nationwide survey
- Autores
- Glujovsky, Demian; Sueldo, Carlos; Coscia, Andrea Valeria; De Carvalho, Paula; Lancuba, Stella; Martinez, Gustavo; Ciapponi, Agustín
- Año de publicación
- 2018
- Idioma
- inglés
- Tipo de recurso
- artículo
- Estado
- versión publicada
- Descripción
- Objectives: To evaluate motivations to perform an elective single embryo transfer (e-SET). Methods: Cross-sectional surveys to reproductive medicine specialists and to infertile patients undergoing assisted reproductive treatments. Results: In the physician's survey (n = 278), we found that the main reasons for not offering e-SET were the physicians’ belief that patients prefer optimizing the pregnancy rates regardless of the potential complications (57.1%). Regarding the decision making process, 76.7% of physicians thought that patients and doctors should make these decisions together and 93.3% would like to have a more formal decision-aid to help with counseling. In the patients’ survey (n = 100), 21.3% chose e-SET, while 33% mentioned that complications associated to multiple pregnancies were insufficiently discussed. Among those patients, none chose to have e-SET, while 30% of those who had a full discussion selected e-SET (p = 0.05). Conclusions: Most physicians did not offer e-SET based on potential patients’ negative feelings. Also, almost 30% take important decisions without the patient's participation. Patients that discussed more thoroughly this topic, more frequently selected e-SET. Almost all the physicians surveyed agreed that decision-aids could help in this important shared-decision process. Practice implications: Decision aids about e-SET vs DET are needed to help patients in the decision making process.
Fil: Glujovsky, Demian. Centro de Estudios en Ginecología y Reproducción; Argentina. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; Argentina
Fil: Sueldo, Carlos. University of California; Estados Unidos
Fil: Coscia, Andrea Valeria. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Fil: De Carvalho, Paula. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; Argentina
Fil: Lancuba, Stella. No especifíca;
Fil: Martinez, Gustavo. No especifíca;
Fil: Ciapponi, Agustín. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública; Argentina - Materia
-
BARRIERS
E-SET
MULTIPLE PREGNANCY
PREFERENCES
SURVEY - Nivel de accesibilidad
- acceso abierto
- Condiciones de uso
- https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
- Repositorio
- Institución
- Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
- OAI Identificador
- oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/185348
Ver los metadatos del registro completo
id |
CONICETDig_7dbabbcd1ce696dd8929d8eae3a79d0e |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/185348 |
network_acronym_str |
CONICETDig |
repository_id_str |
3498 |
network_name_str |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
spelling |
Physicians and patients’ motivations to perform elective single or double-embryo transfers: A nationwide surveyGlujovsky, DemianSueldo, CarlosCoscia, Andrea ValeriaDe Carvalho, PaulaLancuba, StellaMartinez, GustavoCiapponi, AgustínBARRIERSE-SETMULTIPLE PREGNANCYPREFERENCESSURVEYhttps://purl.org/becyt/ford/3.3https://purl.org/becyt/ford/3Objectives: To evaluate motivations to perform an elective single embryo transfer (e-SET). Methods: Cross-sectional surveys to reproductive medicine specialists and to infertile patients undergoing assisted reproductive treatments. Results: In the physician's survey (n = 278), we found that the main reasons for not offering e-SET were the physicians’ belief that patients prefer optimizing the pregnancy rates regardless of the potential complications (57.1%). Regarding the decision making process, 76.7% of physicians thought that patients and doctors should make these decisions together and 93.3% would like to have a more formal decision-aid to help with counseling. In the patients’ survey (n = 100), 21.3% chose e-SET, while 33% mentioned that complications associated to multiple pregnancies were insufficiently discussed. Among those patients, none chose to have e-SET, while 30% of those who had a full discussion selected e-SET (p = 0.05). Conclusions: Most physicians did not offer e-SET based on potential patients’ negative feelings. Also, almost 30% take important decisions without the patient's participation. Patients that discussed more thoroughly this topic, more frequently selected e-SET. Almost all the physicians surveyed agreed that decision-aids could help in this important shared-decision process. Practice implications: Decision aids about e-SET vs DET are needed to help patients in the decision making process.Fil: Glujovsky, Demian. Centro de Estudios en Ginecología y Reproducción; Argentina. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; ArgentinaFil: Sueldo, Carlos. University of California; Estados UnidosFil: Coscia, Andrea Valeria. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: De Carvalho, Paula. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; ArgentinaFil: Lancuba, Stella. No especifíca;Fil: Martinez, Gustavo. No especifíca;Fil: Ciapponi, Agustín. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública; ArgentinaElsevier Ireland2018-05info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/11336/185348Glujovsky, Demian; Sueldo, Carlos; Coscia, Andrea Valeria; De Carvalho, Paula; Lancuba, Stella; et al.; Physicians and patients’ motivations to perform elective single or double-embryo transfers: A nationwide survey; Elsevier Ireland; Patient Education And Counseling; 101; 5; 5-2018; 945-9500738-3991CONICET DigitalCONICETenginfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1016/j.pec.2017.12.010info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0738399117306560info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas2025-09-29T09:33:00Zoai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/185348instacron:CONICETInstitucionalhttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/oai/requestdasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:34982025-09-29 09:33:00.839CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicasfalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Physicians and patients’ motivations to perform elective single or double-embryo transfers: A nationwide survey |
title |
Physicians and patients’ motivations to perform elective single or double-embryo transfers: A nationwide survey |
spellingShingle |
Physicians and patients’ motivations to perform elective single or double-embryo transfers: A nationwide survey Glujovsky, Demian BARRIERS E-SET MULTIPLE PREGNANCY PREFERENCES SURVEY |
title_short |
Physicians and patients’ motivations to perform elective single or double-embryo transfers: A nationwide survey |
title_full |
Physicians and patients’ motivations to perform elective single or double-embryo transfers: A nationwide survey |
title_fullStr |
Physicians and patients’ motivations to perform elective single or double-embryo transfers: A nationwide survey |
title_full_unstemmed |
Physicians and patients’ motivations to perform elective single or double-embryo transfers: A nationwide survey |
title_sort |
Physicians and patients’ motivations to perform elective single or double-embryo transfers: A nationwide survey |
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv |
Glujovsky, Demian Sueldo, Carlos Coscia, Andrea Valeria De Carvalho, Paula Lancuba, Stella Martinez, Gustavo Ciapponi, Agustín |
author |
Glujovsky, Demian |
author_facet |
Glujovsky, Demian Sueldo, Carlos Coscia, Andrea Valeria De Carvalho, Paula Lancuba, Stella Martinez, Gustavo Ciapponi, Agustín |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Sueldo, Carlos Coscia, Andrea Valeria De Carvalho, Paula Lancuba, Stella Martinez, Gustavo Ciapponi, Agustín |
author2_role |
author author author author author author |
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv |
BARRIERS E-SET MULTIPLE PREGNANCY PREFERENCES SURVEY |
topic |
BARRIERS E-SET MULTIPLE PREGNANCY PREFERENCES SURVEY |
purl_subject.fl_str_mv |
https://purl.org/becyt/ford/3.3 https://purl.org/becyt/ford/3 |
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv |
Objectives: To evaluate motivations to perform an elective single embryo transfer (e-SET). Methods: Cross-sectional surveys to reproductive medicine specialists and to infertile patients undergoing assisted reproductive treatments. Results: In the physician's survey (n = 278), we found that the main reasons for not offering e-SET were the physicians’ belief that patients prefer optimizing the pregnancy rates regardless of the potential complications (57.1%). Regarding the decision making process, 76.7% of physicians thought that patients and doctors should make these decisions together and 93.3% would like to have a more formal decision-aid to help with counseling. In the patients’ survey (n = 100), 21.3% chose e-SET, while 33% mentioned that complications associated to multiple pregnancies were insufficiently discussed. Among those patients, none chose to have e-SET, while 30% of those who had a full discussion selected e-SET (p = 0.05). Conclusions: Most physicians did not offer e-SET based on potential patients’ negative feelings. Also, almost 30% take important decisions without the patient's participation. Patients that discussed more thoroughly this topic, more frequently selected e-SET. Almost all the physicians surveyed agreed that decision-aids could help in this important shared-decision process. Practice implications: Decision aids about e-SET vs DET are needed to help patients in the decision making process. Fil: Glujovsky, Demian. Centro de Estudios en Ginecología y Reproducción; Argentina. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; Argentina Fil: Sueldo, Carlos. University of California; Estados Unidos Fil: Coscia, Andrea Valeria. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina Fil: De Carvalho, Paula. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; Argentina Fil: Lancuba, Stella. No especifíca; Fil: Martinez, Gustavo. No especifíca; Fil: Ciapponi, Agustín. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública; Argentina |
description |
Objectives: To evaluate motivations to perform an elective single embryo transfer (e-SET). Methods: Cross-sectional surveys to reproductive medicine specialists and to infertile patients undergoing assisted reproductive treatments. Results: In the physician's survey (n = 278), we found that the main reasons for not offering e-SET were the physicians’ belief that patients prefer optimizing the pregnancy rates regardless of the potential complications (57.1%). Regarding the decision making process, 76.7% of physicians thought that patients and doctors should make these decisions together and 93.3% would like to have a more formal decision-aid to help with counseling. In the patients’ survey (n = 100), 21.3% chose e-SET, while 33% mentioned that complications associated to multiple pregnancies were insufficiently discussed. Among those patients, none chose to have e-SET, while 30% of those who had a full discussion selected e-SET (p = 0.05). Conclusions: Most physicians did not offer e-SET based on potential patients’ negative feelings. Also, almost 30% take important decisions without the patient's participation. Patients that discussed more thoroughly this topic, more frequently selected e-SET. Almost all the physicians surveyed agreed that decision-aids could help in this important shared-decision process. Practice implications: Decision aids about e-SET vs DET are needed to help patients in the decision making process. |
publishDate |
2018 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2018-05 |
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/11336/185348 Glujovsky, Demian; Sueldo, Carlos; Coscia, Andrea Valeria; De Carvalho, Paula; Lancuba, Stella; et al.; Physicians and patients’ motivations to perform elective single or double-embryo transfers: A nationwide survey; Elsevier Ireland; Patient Education And Counseling; 101; 5; 5-2018; 945-950 0738-3991 CONICET Digital CONICET |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/11336/185348 |
identifier_str_mv |
Glujovsky, Demian; Sueldo, Carlos; Coscia, Andrea Valeria; De Carvalho, Paula; Lancuba, Stella; et al.; Physicians and patients’ motivations to perform elective single or double-embryo transfers: A nationwide survey; Elsevier Ireland; Patient Education And Counseling; 101; 5; 5-2018; 945-950 0738-3991 CONICET Digital CONICET |
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1016/j.pec.2017.12.010 info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0738399117306560 |
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/ |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/ |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Elsevier Ireland |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Elsevier Ireland |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET) instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
reponame_str |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
collection |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
instname_str |
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
dasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.ar |
_version_ |
1844613010443730944 |
score |
13.070432 |