1471-0528/asset/BJO_left.gif?v=1&s=0fb87361cdb6be25fdf05019eed6d47f5143f610)
1471-0528/asset/olbannerright.gif?v=1&s=3892ef16ff18d6834c302faf85268a49f5fc588f)
Safety versus success in elective single embryo transfer: women’s preferences for outcomes of in vitro fertilisation
Article first published online: 18 JUN 2007
DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2007.01396.x
RCOG 2007 BJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
Issue
BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology
Volume 114, Issue 8, pages 977–983, August 2007
Additional Information
How to Cite
Scotland, G., McNamee, P., Peddie, V. and Bhattacharya, S. (2007), Safety versus success in elective single embryo transfer: women’s preferences for outcomes of in vitro fertilisation. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 114: 977–983. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2007.01396.x
Publication History
- Issue published online: 18 JUN 2007
- Article first published online: 18 JUN 2007
- Accepted 16 April 2007. Published OnlineEarly 18 June 2007.
- Abstract
- Article
- References
- Cited By
Keywords:
- IVF;
- multiple pregnancy;
- patient preferences;
- single embryo transfer
Objective To assess whether women waiting to undergo in vitro fertilisation (IVF) view adverse outcomes associated with twin pregnancy as more desirable than having no pregnancy at all.
Design Women’s preference values for five adverse birth outcomes associated with twin pregnancy were compared with their preference value for treatment failure (TF), i.e. no pregnancy at all.
Setting Aberdeen Fertility Centre, University of Aberdeen, UK.
Population A total of 74 women waiting to undergo IVF.
Methods The standard gamble method was used to elicit women’s preference values for giving birth to a child with physical impairments (PI), cognitive impairments (CI), or visual impairments (VI), perinatal death (PD) without a subsequent pregnancy, premature delivery (PremD), and TF (no pregnancy).
Main outcome measures Preference values were elicited on a scale where 1 represents giving birth to a healthy child and 0 represents immediate death.
Results The median preference values for having a child with PI, CI, or VI were 0.940, 0.970, and 0.975, respectively. The median values for PremD, PD, and TF were 0.955, 0.725, and 0.815, respectively. Having no child at all was valued significantly lower than having a child with PI, CI, or VI (P < 0.01) but significantly higher than PD (P < 0.01).
Conclusions Some women waiting for IVF treatment view severe child disability outcomes associated with double embryo transfer as being more desirable than having no child at all. Women embarking on IVF may be influenced more strongly by considerations of ‘treatment success’ rather than future risks to their offspring.