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.

Less is more: increased gonadotropin use for ovarian stimulation adversely influences clinical pregnancy and live birth after in vitro fertilization.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if attempts to maximize oocyte yield during ovarian stimulation translates into improved outcome of in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles. DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING: Academic tertiary care IVF center. PATIENT(S): 806 de-identified nondonor IVF cycles. INTERVENTION(S): Evaluation of fresh nondonor IVF cycles (n = 806) for the period January 1, 1999, to December 30, 2001. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Cycle cancellation, clinical pregnancy, spontaneous miscarriage, and live birth after IVF. RESULT(S): Advancing age, independent of ovarian reserve status (reflected by early follicular phase FSH and estradiol) augured a worse prognosis for all outcomes. Higher gonadotropin use lowered cycle cancellations but was associated with a statistically significantly reduced likelihood of clinical pregnancy and live birth and a trend toward a higher likelihood for spontaneous miscarriage after IVF. CONCLUSION(S): Our data add to the accruing literature suggesting adverse influences of excess gonadotropin use on IVF outcomes. Although an aggressive approach to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation results in a statistically significant reduction in cycle cancellations, the excessive use of gonadotropins detrimentally influences live birth after IVF.

Day 6 estradiol level predicts cycle cancellation among poor responder patients undergoing in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer cycles using a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist flare regimen.

PURPOSE: To compare two GnRHa flare protocols among poor responders undergoing IVF-ET and to evaluate if a Day 6 estradiol level can predict outcome. METHODS: Retrospective analyses of GnRHa flare IVF cycles among poor responders. Group A ("miniflare," N = 36) 40 microg GnRHa s.c. b.i.d. from Day 3; Group B ("standard flare," N = 24) 1 mg GnRHa on Days 2-3; 0.5 mg GnRHa from Day 4. ROC analysis was performed to find a Day 6 estradiol value that is predictive of cycle outcome. RESULTS: With the standard flare, patients required less gonadotropins and tended to have fewer cancellations and higher pregnancy rates. A Day 6 estradiol level < or = 75 pg/mL was predictive of cycle cancellation, but not of pregnancy outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Standard GnRHa flare offers some advantages over the miniflare. Day 6 estradiol < or = 75 pg/mL is predictive of cycle cancellation. When the estradiol level is low on Day 6 (no flare), early cancellation should be considered.