Acceptance of genetic editing and of whole genome sequencing of human embryos by patients with infertility before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Has acceptance of heritable genome editing (HGE) and whole genome sequencing for preimplantation genetic testing (PGT-WGS) of human embryos changed after the onset of COVID-19 among infertility patients? DESIGN: A written survey conducted between April and June 2018 and July and December 2021 among patients at a university-affiliated infertility practice. The questionnaire ascertained the acceptance of HGE for specific therapeutic or genetic 'enhancement' indications and of PGT-WGS to prevent adult disease. RESULTS: In 2021 and 2018, 172 patients and 469 patients (response rates: 90% and 91%, respectively) completed the questionnaire. In 2021, significantly more participants reported a positive attitude towards HGE, for therapeutic and enhancement indications. In 2021 compared with 2018, respondents were more likely to use HGE to have healthy children with their own gametes (85% versus 77%), to reduce disease risk for adult-onset polygenic disorders (78% versus 67%), to increase life expectancy (55% versus 40%), intelligence (34% versus 26%) and creativity (33% versus 24%). Fifteen per cent of the 2021 group reported a more positive attitude towards HGE because of COVID-19 and less than 1% a more negative attitude. In contrast, support for PGT-WGS was similar in 2021 and 2018. CONCLUSIONS: A significantly increased acceptance of HGE was observed, but not of PGT-WGS, after the onset of COVID-19. Although the pandemic may have contributed to this change, the exact reasons remain unknown and warrant further investigation. Whether increased acceptability of HGE may indicate an increase in acceptability of emerging biomedical technologies in general needs further investigation.

How to provide fertility treatment during COVID-19 pandemic.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The emergence of the novel coronavirus infection that arose in Wuhan, China in December 2019 has resulted in an epidemic that has quickly expanded to become one of the most significant public health threats in recent times. The objective of this review is to summarize how this pandemic has affected the activity of a Reproductive Medicine Center, which established a series of measures in parallel with governments decisions and scientific societies. RECENT FINDINGS: The control measures adopted for restarting the healthcare activity should be equitable and inclusive. Moreover, this pandemic has implied changes in treatments and strategies to be alert regarding the daily changing information. Finally, for ensuring a safe practice both for patients and staff, it is important to detect asymptomatic patients, so Reproductive Medicine centers must take special care with screening and testing procedures. SUMMARY: The pandemic has pushed up toward a new reality in terms of Assisted Reproductive treatments, where social distance and responsibility are protagonists. We face a new challenge of balancing between responding to the committed efforts of infertile couples to achieve pregnancy and safeguarding the health of the future parents and their children during this time of pandemic.

Association Between COVID-19 Vaccination and Artificial Insemination Outcomes for Couples Experiencing Infertility.

This cohort study investigates the association between COVID-19 vaccination status and artificial insemination by partner outcomes among couples experiencing infertility in China.

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and associated factors among infertile couples undergoing assisted reproductive treatment.

Although periconception vaccination is important to maternal and neonatal health, little is known about the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among infertile couples seeking fertility treatment. Thus, we conducted this survey among infertile patients in a reproductive medicine center, between September 2021 and December 2021, to estimate the prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and its influencing factors. Information was collected through face-to-face interviews among volunteers. Among the 987 included interviewees, 17.33% reported hesitancy in primary vaccination, 25.63% reported hesitancy in booster vaccination, and 32.32% delayed the primary vaccination. Hesitancy in primary vaccination was associated with unexplained infertility (OR: 1.77, 95% CI: 1.05-2.98), ongoing IVF treatment (OR: 2.17, 95% CI: 1.22-3.89), concerns for vaccine safety (OR: 4.13, 95% CI: 2.66-6.42), effectiveness (OR: 1.62, 95% CI: 1.15-2.28), and influence on pregnancy (OR: 2.80, 95% CI: 1.68-4.67). These factors were also associated with hesitancy in booster vaccination. Delay of the primary vaccination was inversely associated with a college or above degree (OR: 0.49, 95% CI: 0.27-0.87), previous history of influenza vaccination (OR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.46-0.98), and was positively associated with concerns for the influence on pregnancy (OR: 7.78, 95% CI: 5.01-12.07). It is necessary to carry out targeted education program by health professionals to publicize the benefits of periconception vaccination, and to reduce the resistance to COVID-19 vaccine among infertile couples.

Rates of COVID-19 infection among in vitro fertilization patients undergoing treatment at a university reproductive health center.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused an unprecedented challenge for in-vitro fertilization (IVF) patients. The incidence of COVID-19 infection among this population is a fundamental knowledge gap. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the rate of COVID-19 infection among IVF patients compared to other gynecologic surgery patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study evaluated the incidence of COVID-19 infection among patients undergoing IVF, female fertility-related surgeries (FRS) and other gynecologic surgeries at a single academic institution in Los Angeles, California. All patients underwent routine COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) screening prior to treatment. RESULT: A total of 2742 patients underwent asymptomatic COVID-19 screening before a surgical procedure or IVF between March 1, 2020, and April 5, 2021. The rate of COVID-19 infection among patients who underwent preoperative testing for a non-fertility-related gynecologic procedure was 1.74% (28/1612). In comparison, the positive test results for those who underwent either FRS or IVF were 0.56% (1/180) and 0.34% (1/290), respectively, representing 6.70% (2/30) of positive tests for the whole cohort. The infertility patients had a significantly lower positivity rate compared to the other gynecologic patients during preoperative COVID-19 testing (0.43% vs 1.74%, p = 0.03). CONCLUSION(S): Our study demonstrated that there was a significantly lower incidence of COVID-19 infections in infertility patients undergoing IVF or FRS compared to other gynecologic surgery patients. Future studies should evaluate the cost-effectiveness of routine screening in both the gynecology and infertility patient population, especially in the setting of different variant surges and vaccination rates.

Telehealth provider experience in reproductive endocrinology and infertility clinics during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.

PURPOSE: To assess telehealth services offered by reproductive endocrinology and infertility specialists and to gauge provider experiences with incorporating telehealth into their practices. METHODS: A 16-question web-based survey on use of telehealth was distributed to Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology (SART) clinics and to Society for Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility (SREI) members. Clinic demographic data, telehealth descriptive data, and provider satisfaction with use of telehealth were assessed. Results were collected via Survey Monkey. RESULTS: A total of 1160 individuals (330 SART clinic contacts and 830 SREI members) were reached via email with an 18.6% (216) survey response rate. All respondents indicated that they offer telehealth visits. Several telehealth platforms were used, with Zoom (62.7%) and telehealth through the clinic's electronic medical record platform (34.8%) being the most common. The majority of participants (87.0%) anticipate they will offer telehealth visits after the COVID-19 pandemic. Roughly two-thirds (64.4%) of respondents anticipate fewer telehealth visits after the pandemic because of logistics, cost, and patient/provider preference. Nearly all providers are either "very satisfied" (66.2%) or "somewhat satisfied" (31.0%) with telehealth overall. CONCLUSION: Telehealth enabled safe patient-provider interactions throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. While only one-third of survey respondents offered telehealth services before the pandemic, nearly all providers express satisfaction with telehealth and anticipate they will offer telehealth services henceforth.

Effects of COVID-19 vaccination status, vaccine type, and vaccination interval on IVF pregnancy outcomes in infertile couples.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to explore whether the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) vaccination of both partners in infertile couples, different types of COVID-19 vaccines, and the interval between complete vaccination and oocyte retrieval or embryo transfer (ET) affect the quality of embryos and pregnancy rates in in vitro fertilization (IVF). METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study, comprising 735 infertile couples conducted between December 6, 2021, and March 31, 2022, in a single university hospital-based IVF center. The patients were divided into different groups according to the vaccination status of both partners in infertile couples, type of vaccine, and interval between complete vaccination and IVF treatment. The embryo quality and pregnancy rates were compared among different groups. RESULTS: The results showed that embryo quality and pregnancy rates had no significant differences among different groups. The multivariate regression model showed that the vaccination status of both infertile couples, types of vaccines, and intervals had no significant effects on the clinical pregnancy rate. CONCLUSIONS: The vaccination status of both partners in infertile couples, different types of vaccines, and time intervals have no effect on embryo quality and pregnancy rates in IVF. This is the first study to compare the vaccination status of both partners in infertile couples and the impact of different vaccine types on pregnancy rates and embryo quality in detail. Our findings provide evidence of vaccine safety for infertile couples wishing to undergo IVF treatment. This evidence is crucial for decision-making by clinicians and policymakers involved in IVF cycles.

Impact of Protocol Adjustments Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic on Infertility Treatment Outcomes.

As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, our centre made adjustments that reduced the number of patient visits, ultrasound scans, laboratory investigations, and face-to face instructions. The objective of this study was to evaluate whether these changes had any effect on the pregnancy rate for patients undergoing infertility treatment. The primary outcome was clinical pregnancy rates from intrauterine insemination and frozen embryo transfer. Clinical pregnancy rates were not statistically different between patients who underwent either procedure before and after the protocols were put in place. It is reassuring to know our pandemic protocol adjustments did not have a negative impact on infertility treatment outcomes.

Coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination and infertility treatment outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the influence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) messenger ribonucleic acid vaccine on ovarian response and in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment outcomes. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study. SETTING: A tertiary university-affiliated medical center and a private medical center. PATIENT(S): The study included a total of 400 patients, 200 vaccinated women and 200 age-matched unvaccinated women, who underwent IVF in January-April 2021. INTERVENTION(S): None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The mean number of oocytes retrieved and clinical pregnancy rates in vaccinated vs. unvaccinated patients. RESULT(S): A total of 200 patients underwent oocyte retrieval 14-68 days after receiving COVID-19 vaccination. No difference was found in the mean number of oocytes retrieved per cycle (10.63 vs. 10.72) between vaccinated and unvaccinated patients. Among 128 vaccinated and 133 unvaccinated patients who underwent fresh embryos transfers, no difference was demonstrated in the clinical pregnancy rates (32.8% vs. 33.1%), with 42 and 44 clinical pregnancies, respectively. The fertilization rates and mean number of cryopreserved embryos were similar between the 2 groups in freeze-all cycles (55.43% vs. 54.29% and 3.59 vs. 3.28, respectively). Among vaccinated and unvaccinated patients who underwent fresh embryo transfers, no difference was noted in the fertilization rate (64.81% vs. 61.98%) and transferred embryos' quality. Regression models applied demonstrated no effect of the vaccine on oocyte yields and pregnancy rates. CONCLUSION(S): The COVID-19 messenger ribonucleic acid vaccine did not affect the ovarian response or pregnancy rates in IVF treatment. Women should be vaccinated for COVID-19 before attempting to conceive via IVF treatments, given the higher risk of severe illness in pregnant women.

Changes in sexual behaviour, anxiety symptoms, and quality of couple relationship of patients with infertility during the COVID-19 lockdown.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to explore the perceived changes in sexual behaviour during COVID-19 lockdown, anxiety symptoms, and couple relationship of patients with infertility. METHODS: We performed an observational cross-sectional study between 20 November 2020 and 15 January 2021. We used stratified analysis of different stress levels and Quality of Marriage Index (QMI) scores to compare the perceived changes in sexual behaviour, anxiety symptoms, and couple relationship. The logistic regression model was performed to assess factors correlated with couples' relationship quality during the lockdown. Furthermore, we performed pathway analyses to assess whether the changes in sexual behaviour, stress level, or psychological anxiety during the lockdown could predict the quality of couple relationship. RESULTS: A total of 940 patients with infertility were included in this study. When we conducted a stratified analysis of the participants, significant differences were found between the changes in their sexual behaviour, stress levels, and couple relationship quality. The logistic regression model showed that sex, anxiety symptoms, decreased sexual satisfaction, sexual activity frequency, and income levels were closely related to couple relationship quality. Pathway analyses indicated that changes in their sexual behaviour, anxiety symptoms, and stress levels could all predict the quality of couple relationship. CONCLUSIONS: The perceived changes in sexual behaviour with different stress levels and couple relationship quality showed significant differences. Analysing the related factors that affect the quality of couple relationship, especially in times of crisis, is of great significance as this information can contribute to the improvement of treatment for patients with infertility.

Patients' views of delayed fertility care during the COVID-19 pandemic as a conception catastrophe: the experience of U.S. FertilityIQ users.

BACKGROUND: Assessment of psychological reactions to delays in fertility treatment have often utilized single clinic samples during the time that fertility treatments were paused. We, therefore, assessed emotional reactions to treatment cancelations due to COVID-19 in infertility patients across the United States after treatments had begun to resume. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey emailed on 27 May 2020 and closed on 30 June 2020, to 53,600 FertilityIQ.com website users inquiring about their experience since the COVID-19 pandemic. A subset of FertilityIQ users (n = 13,490) opened the survey invitation and 1806 respondents participated in the survey (13.4% response rate). RESULTS: The majority of respondents (female, 67.4%; male, 61.7%) were 31-40 years old; most were planning to start treatment immediately (women, 42.6%; men, 44.7%) or were undergoing treatment (women, 34.9%; men, 29.8%) at the time of treatment cancelation. Patients (women, 21.1%; men 19.1%) or clinics (women, 57.7%; men, 40.4%) canceled treatment. Most clinics had resumed treatment at the time of the study (women, 90.0%; men, 73.7%). Cancelation resulted in sadness (women, 83.9%; men 86.7%) and anger (women, 45.4%; men, 36.7%); greater than half of the participants whose treatment was canceled (women: 66.8%, n = 630; men: 73.7%, n = 14) agreed with cancelations. Greater than 70% of respondents were at least somewhat concerned about reproductive chances (women, 84.7%; men, 72.4%) and exclusion of partners (women, 73.3%; men, 72.4%). Distress/concern was associated with clinic cancelation, disagreement with delays, age, diagnosis, and concern about delays and pregnancy chances (p <.05). CONCLUSIONS: Respondents were distressed/concerned about the effect of the pandemic on their fertility. Distress was highest in women with a poorer fertility prognosis, no control over treatment cancelation, and high concern about the effect of treatment delay on pregnancy chances. Emotional support, education regarding treatment delay and fertility, and efforts where possible, to include patients in decisions to delay treatment are warranted in future treatment delays.

State of assisted reproduction technology in the coronavirus disease 2019 era and consequences on human reproductive system.

The outbreak of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has created havoc on the socio-economic aspect of the world. With billions of lives being affected by this wrecking pandemic, global fertility services were also not left untouched by its impact. The possibility of sexual transmission of SARS-CoV-2 virus, its impact on male and female fertility, pregnancy, its potential teratogenic effect, and handling of gametes in the clinical laboratories were major concerns among reproductive medicine specialists, which led down all the reproductive health services, including IUI, IVF/ICSI in most of the countries. Even the people did not intend to conceive during the pandemic crisis and were hesitant to avail such services. Discrete evidence regarding the pathophysiology of COVID-19 infection and its impact on the human reproductive system is not very clear. In this review article, we intend to incorporate all the evidence related to the COVID-19 infection and its impact on human reproduction available to date. It is our responsibility to provide rightful information and to keep our patients familiar with the existing lack of clear evidence. In this COVID-19 era, it is important that the fertility management be prioritized in sub-fertile couples with diminished fertility reserve and high-risk conditions, like malignancies, that may affect their long-term fertility prospects.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on infertility patients and endometriosis patients in the Netherlands.

RESEARCH QUESTION: How do infertility patients, endometriosis patients and health-care providers rate virtual care as an alternative to physical consultations during the first lockdown of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in the Netherlands, and how does this influence quality of life and quality of care? DESIGN: Infertility patients and endometriosis patients from a university hospital and members of national patient organizations, as well as healthcare providers in infertility and endometriosis care, were asked to participate between May and October 2020. The distributed online questionnaires consisted of an appraisal of virtual care and an assessment of fertility-related quality of life (FertiQol) and patient-centredness of endometriosis care (ENDOCARE). RESULTS: Questionnaires were returned by 330 infertility patients, 181 endometriosis patients and 101 healthcare providers. Of these, 75.9% of infertility patients, 64.8% of endometriosis patients and 80% of healthcare providers rated telephone consultations as a good alternative to physical consultations during the COVID-19-pandemic. Only 21.3%, 14.8% and 19.2% of the three groups rated telephone consultations as a good replacement for physical consultations in the future. A total of 76.6% and 35.9% of the infertility and endometriosis patients reported increased levels of stress during the pandemic. Infertility patients scored lower on the FertiQol, while the ENDOCARE results care seem comparable to the reference population. CONCLUSIONS: Virtual care seems to be a good alternative for infertility and endometriosis patients in circumstances where physical consultations are not possible. Self-reported stress is especially high in infertility patients during the COVID-19-pandemic. Healthcare providers should aim to improve their patients' ability to cope.

First trimester pregnancy outcomes in a large IVF center from the Lombardy County (Italy) during the peak COVID-19 pandemic.

At the beginning of 2020, the Italian Lombardy region was hit by an "epidemic tsunami" which was, at that point in time, one of the worst pandemics ever. At that moment the effects of SARS-COV 2 were still unknown. To evaluate whether the pandemic has influenced ART (Assisted Reproduction Techniques) outcomes in an asymptomatic infertile population treated at one of the major COVID-19 epicentres during the weeks immediately preceding lockdown. All ART procedures performed during two time periods were compared: November 1st, 2018 to February 28th, 2019 (non-COVID-19 risk) and November 1st, 2019 to February 29th, 2020 (COVID-19 risk). In total 1749 fresh cycles (883 non-COVID-19 risk and 866 COVID-19 risk) and1166 embryos and 63 oocytes warming cycles (538 and 37 during non-COVID and 628 and 26 during COVID-19 risk, respectively) were analysed. Clinical pregnancies per cycle were not different: 370 (25.38%) in non-COVID versus 415 (27.30%) (p = 0.237) during COVID-19 risk. There were no differences in biochemical pregnancy rates 52 (3.57%) versus 38 (2.50%) (p = 0.089) nor in ectopic pregnancies 4 (1.08%) versus 3 (0.72%) (p = 0.594), spontaneous miscarriages 84 (22.70%) versus 103 (24.82%) p = 0.487, nor in intrauterine ongoing pregnancies 282 (76.22%) versus 309 (74.46%) p = 0.569. A multivariate analysis investigating differences in spontaneous miscarriage rate showed no differences between the two timeframes. Our results support no differences in asymptomatic infertile couples' ART outcomes between the pre COVID and COVID-19 periods in one of the earliest and most severe pandemic areas.

SARS-CoV-2 vs. human gametes, embryos and cryopreservation.

The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, is an unprecedented global situation, and all countries have adopted their own measurements to mitigate the spread of the virus in the first as well as in the subsequent waves of infection. All measures, especially in the first wave of the pandemic, were in combination with recommendations provided by professional and scientific organizations. Similar measures were applied to specific procedures, such as the management of infertility, including in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET) treatments. Although there is no clear scientific evidence yet that the SARS-CoV-2 may exert negative effects on IVF outcome, especially at the early stages, several clinical reports indicate that the virus may impact male fertility through specific receptors presented at the somatic cells of the testis and used by the virus in order to gain entry to the respective cells. Nevertheless, it is not unreasonable to suspect that the virus may affect sperm function as well as oocyte performance directly through specific receptors or indirectly through other signaling pathways. Despite the good practice of IVF laboratory techniques, culture media may also be contaminated during equilibration when airborne virus's particles can contaminate culture media from an already infected embryology area or staff. Furthermore, although there is no clinical evidence, liquid nitrogen could be a route of infection for gametes and embryos when it has been contaminated during production or transportation. Therefore, cryopreservation of gametes and embryos must be virus-free. This communication aims to provide some aspects of the possible impact of the virus on gametes and embryos and how it may affect the cryopreservation procedures.Abbreviations: ACE2: angiotensin- converting enzyme 2; ART: assisted reproductive technology; ASRM: American Society for Reproductive Medicine; CDC: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; COVID-19: coronavirus disease 2019; ESHRE: European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology; ET: embryo transfer; FSH: follicle stimulating hormone; IFFS: International Federation of Fertility Societies; IVF: in vitro fertilization; LH: luteinizing hormone; LN: liquid nitrogen; SARS-CoV-2: severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2; T: testosterone; WHO: World Health Organization.

Perceptions and lessons from web-based interviews for the reproductive endocrinology and infertility fellowship application cycle.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the experience and perceptions of reproductive endocrinology and infertility fellowship applicants and program directors (PDs) regarding the current and future use of web-based interviews (WBIs). DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Nationwide cohort. PATIENT(S): Reproductive endocrinology and infertility fellowship applicants and PDs participating in the 2020 application cycle. INTERVENTION(S): Anonymous survey sent to applicants and PDs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Descriptive study evaluating the experience and satisfaction of applicants and PDs with WBIs. RESULT(S): Forty-six percent of applicants and eligible PDs responded to our survey. Most applicants and PDs responded that WBIs were adequate for conveying a sense of a program's strengths, faculty, diversity, clinical training, and research opportunities, but less than half responded that WBIs were adequate in providing a sense of the program's clinical site and facilities. After WBIs, both applicants (73%) and PDs (86%) were able to rank with confidence. The cost of WBIs was significantly lower for both applicants (median: $100) and programs (median: $100) than the costs previously reported for in-person interviews. The applicants interviewed at more programs than they would have if the interviews were on-site, and Zoom was the highest rated platform used. Most applicants and PDs responded that WBIs were an adequate substitute, and that they should continue after the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Furthermore, most of the PDs were planning to continue to use WBIs in some capacity. CONCLUSION(S): Both applicants and PDs had favorable experiences with and perceptions of WBIs, and most endorse the continued use of this interview modality. The findings of this study can help guide and optimize future WBI practices.

Does mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccine influence patients' performance during IVF-ET cycle?

OBJECTIVE: No information exists in the literature regarding the effect of mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccine on subsequent IVF cycle attempt. We therefore aim to assess the influence of mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccine on IVF treatments. DESIGN: An observational study. SETTING: A tertiary, university-affiliated medical center. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All couples undergoing consecutive ovarian stimulation cycles for IVF before and after receiving mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, and reached the ovum pick-up (OPU) stage. The stimulation characteristics and embryological variables of couples undergoing IVF treatments after receiving mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccine were assessed and compared to their IVF cycles prior to vaccination. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Stimulation characteristics and embryological variables. RESULTS: Thirty-six couples resumed IVF treatment 7-85 days after receiving mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. No in-between cycles differences were observed in ovarian stimulation and embryological variables before and after receiving mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccine did not affect patients' performance or ovarian reserve in their immediate subsequent IVF cycle. Future larger studies with longer follow-up will be needed to validate our observations.

We are here for you: infertility clinic communication during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.

PURPOSE: To study how SART-member fertility clinics communicated via clinic websites during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic following publication of ASRM COVID-19 Task Force recommendations. METHODS: SART-member fertility clinic websites were systematically surveyed for the presence of an REI-specific COVID-19 message (REI-CM) and analyzed for their adherence to ASRM guidance. RESULTS: Of the 381 active clinic websites, 249 (65.3%) had REI-specific COVID messaging. The presence of REI-CM was more common in private than in academic practices (73% vs 38%, p < 0.001) and with increasing practice volume: 38% of clinics with < 200 annual cycles vs 91% of clinics with > 1000 cycles (p < 0.001). Adherence to ASRM guidance was more common in academic than in private practices (54% vs 31%, p = 0.02). Additionally, 9% of REI-CM (n = 23) announced continued treatment regardless of a patient's clinical urgency. This messaging was more common in groups doing > 1000 cycles a year (18%, p = 0.009). Clinics treating all-comers were less likely to cite ASRM than other clinics (41% vs 62%, p = 0.045). However, 75% (n = 14) cited COVID-19 guidance from WHO, CDC, and state and local governments. CONCLUSIONS: Clinic response to ASRM recommendations during the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic was heterogeneous. Although academic practices were more likely to follow ASRM guidance, there was a lower extent of patient-facing messaging among academic practices than private clinics. In event of further escalations of this and future pandemics, clinics can learn from experiences to provide clear messaging to patients.

Life on pause: An analysis of UK fertility patients' coping mechanisms after the cancellation of fertility treatment due to COVID-19.

In March 2020, fertility clinics across the UK began cancelling all assisted reproductive technology (ART) treatment, with the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) stopping all ART treatment from going ahead beyond the 15th April 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This article examines the coping mechanisms adopted by fertility patients during this time, focussing on the emotional support received from online fertility forums and fertility clinics during the indeterminate wait for treatment to resume. The study draws upon an online survey which assessed the mental health and wellbeing of 124 female fertility patients whose ART treatment was cancelled due to the Coronavirus pandemic. The findings indicate a potential for improved communication between fertility clinics and patients in order to reduce psychological stress and isolation during the postponement of ART treatment, alongside better utilisation of online platforms as mechanisms for support. This article adds to the growing body of knowledge concerned with the implications of denying reproductive rights to the infertility community during a global pandemic. It also contributes to sociological discussions on the support mechanisms available to those navigating infertility and the wider social management of uncertainty.

Psychological experience and coping strategies of patients in the Northeast US delaying care for infertility during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: On March 17, 2020 an expert ASRM task force recommended the temporary suspension of new, non-urgent fertility treatments during an ongoing world-wide pandemic of Covid-19. We surveyed at the time of resumption of fertility care the psychological experience and coping strategies of patients pausing their care due to Covid-19 and examined which factors were associated and predictive of resilience, anxiety, stress and hopefulness. METHODS: Cross sectional cohort patient survey using an anonymous, self-reported, single time, web-based, HIPPA compliant platform (REDCap). Survey sampled two Northeast academic fertility practices (Yale Medicine Fertility Center in CT and Montefiore's Institute for Reproductive Medicine and Health in NY). Data from multiple choice and open response questions collected demographic, reproductive history, experience and attitudes about Covid-19, prior infertility treatment, sense of hopefulness and stress, coping strategies for mitigating stress and two validated psychological surveys to assess anxiety (six-item short-form State Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAl-6)) and resilience (10-item Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale, (CD-RISC-10). RESULTS: Seven hundred thirty-four patients were sent invitations to participate. Two hundred fourteen of 734 (29.2%) completed the survey. Patients reported their fertility journey had been delayed a mean of 10 weeks while 60% had been actively trying to conceive > 1.5 years. The top 5 ranked coping skills from a choice of 19 were establishing a daily routine, going outside regularly, exercising, maintaining social connection via phone, social media or Zoom and continuing to work. Having a history of anxiety (p < 0.0001) and having received oral medication as prior infertility treatment (p < 0.0001) were associated with lower resilience. Increased hopefulness about having a child at the time of completing the survey (p < 0.0001) and higher resilience scores (p < 0.0001) were associated with decreased anxiety. Higher reported stress scores (p < 0.0001) were associated with increased anxiety. Multiple multivariate regression showed being non-Hispanic black (p = 0.035) to be predictive of more resilience while variables predictive of less resilience were being a full-time homemaker (p = 0.03), having received oral medication as prior infertility treatment (p = 0.003) and having higher scores on the STAI-6 (< 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Prior to and in anticipation of further pauses in treatment the clinical staff should consider pretreatment screening for psychological distress and provide referral sources. In addition, utilization of a patient centered approach to care should be employed.