Comparative study of the effect of two counseling methods on fertility motivation in infertile couples.

BACKGROUND: Reproductive motivation is a complex issue that has cultural, behavioral, and ideological roots and changes in the context of population transfer and economic and social development. Reproductive motivations include positive and negative motivations that can be influenced by education. Training can be done in different ways. It seems that face-to-face training increases learning. On the other hand, face-to-face training increases participants' cooperation and desire for educational topics. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare and determine the effect of two counseling methods on the fertility motivation of infertile couples. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This intervention study was performed on 68 men and women with infertility referring to Milad Infertility Center in Mashhad in 2016-2017. Subjects were randomly assigned to two methods of counseling. Participants completed written consent to participate in the study. Infertile couples were included in the study if they met the inclusion criteria. The fertility motivation questionnaire was completed by the participants at the beginning of the study before the consultation and 2 weeks after the consultation. The collected data were analyzed by SPSS Software Version 16. RESULTS: According to the independent t-test, there was no statistically significant difference between the mean scores of positive fertility motivation in the two groups of face-to-face and telephone counseling before the intervention. Independent t-test showed that 2 weeks after the intervention, there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of this variable (P = 0.283). There was no statistically significant difference between the mean scores of positive fertility motivation in the face-to-face counseling group before and after the intervention. Further, in the telephone counseling group, there was no significant difference between the mean scores of positive fertility motivation in the two stages before and after the intervention. According to the independent t-test, there was a statistically significant difference between the mean scores of negative fertility motivation in the two groups of face-to-face and telephone counseling before the intervention (P = 0.025). However, this test showed that there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of this variable 2 weeks after the intervention. CONCLUSION: The results of this study showed that face-to-face and telephone counseling did not have a significant effect on fertility motivations of infertile couples. In other words, the mean scores of positive and negative fertility motivations before and after counseling remained unchanged in both groups and the two groups did not differ in this regard. In other words, the issue of fertility motivation in infertile women can be affected by different characteristics such as social, family, cultural, and economic conditions of individuals. If infertile people do not make having a child a necessity in their lives and cope with it more easily, no counseling can change their motivation. On the other hand, if infertile women consider having a child as an essential part of their married life and the health of their married life, counseling can have the greatest effect on them.

The effect of face-to-face and telephone counseling on the desire for adoption in infertile couples.

BACKGROUND: Fertility is always one of the most important functions of the family. Having a child equals growing up and entering the adult world. Adoption is one of the methods that can be considered to treat infertility. One of the duties of health professionals, especially midwives, is to advise and educate infertile people, which helps them in a way beyond medical treatment. Therefore, this study was conducted to determine the effect of face-to-face and telephone counseling on the desire for adoption in infertile couples. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The present study was a two-group counseling intervention study that was performed on 34 infertile couples referred to Mashhad Infertility Center. Infertile couples were randomly assigned to face-to-face and telephone counseling groups. All participants completed the Adoption Adoption Questionnaire at the beginning and end of the study. Data were analyzed by spss16 software. RESULTS: The mean score of propensity to adopt in the face-to-face counseling group 2 weeks after the intervention was significantly higher than before the intervention. Furthermore, the mean score of desire for adoption in the telephone counseling group increased significantly 2 weeks after the intervention compared to before (P < 0.001). Adoption scores varied in the face-to-face counseling group at 3.15 and in the telephone counseling group at 3.23. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups (P < 0.885). The most common reason for not wanting to adopt was hope for self-treatment and having children (70.6% women and 67.6% men). The most common reason for accepting an adopted child was the strong need to have a child (23.5% in women and 23.5% in men). CONCLUSION: According to the results of this study, counseling can increase people's awareness of the conditions of adoption and thus increase the desire of people to accept the adopted child. For this reason, considering adoption counseling sessions for infertile couples who have been receiving infertility treatment for a long time but have not become pregnant can help the couple decide.

Comparison of the effect of two methods of counseling (face to face and telephone) on awareness and attitude toward adoption in infertile couples.

INTRODUCTION: Many infertile people have heard about adoption, but little is known about the true meaning of adoption and how it is accepted. Giving the right information about adoption is effective in making the right decision for couples. As a result, there is a need to intervene and provide training to improve community attitudes and increase adoption among infertile people. Therefore, the present study aimed to determine the effect of two counseling methods (face-to-face and telephone) on awareness and attitude toward adoption in infertile couples. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The present study is a randomized quasi-experimental study of two groups in the Milad Infertility Center of Mashhad on 34 (each group of 17 couples) infertile couples with the criteria to enter the study. Couples were randomly assigned to two telephone and face-to-face counseling groups, and each individual's awareness and attitudes toward adoption were completed separately before and after counseling. The average number of face-to-face sessions for face-to-face counseling was three 60-min sessions and six 30-min sessions for telephone counseling. RESULTS: Based on the results of t-test, there was a statistically significant difference between the average score of awareness of adoption before and after the intervention (2 weeks after the last counseling session), in infertile couples in face-to-face training group and in telephone training group (P < 0.0001). The score of the attitude toward adoption before counseling in the face-to-face counseling group was 60.55 ± 5.5, which reached 66.76 ± 4.7 after counseling. Based on the results of the T-pair test, this difference was significant (P < 0.0001). In addition, in the telephone counseling group, the score of attitude toward adoption increased from 59.53. 7.4 to 67.73 ± 7.5, which was a significant difference in terms of t-pair test. The mean score of attitudes toward adoption was not statistically significant in the two groups (P = 0.653). CONCLUSION: The results of this study showed that both counseling methods (face to face and telephone) increase the level of awareness and attitude of couples about adoption, but neither method was superior to the other.