IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0221149.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • 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.

Suggested Citation

  • Alison E Zimon & Donald S Shepard & Jeffrey Prottas & Kristin L Rooney & Jeanie Ungerleider & Yara A Halasa-Rappel & Denny Sakkas & Selwyn P Oskowitz, 2019. "Embryo donation: Survey of in-vitro fertilization (IVF) patients and randomized trial of complimentary counseling," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(8), pages 1-17, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0221149
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0221149
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0221149
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0221149&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0221149?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0221149. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.