Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Hum Fertil (Camb) ; 26(2): 365-372, 2023 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37063051

RESUMO

There are conflicting narratives over what drives demand for add-ons. We undertook an online survey of IVF patients to determine whether patients perceive that use of IVF add-ons is driven by patients or practitioners. People who underwent IVF in the UK in the previous five years were recruited via social media Survey questions focussed on the roles of clinician offer and patient request, including who first suggested use of add-ons in IVF consultations, where patients first heard about them, and which information sources they trusted. From a total of 261 responses, 224 met the inclusion criteria. Overall, 67% of respondents had used one or more IVF add-ons, most commonly: time-lapse imaging (27%), EmbryoGlue (27%), and endometrial scratching (26%). Overall, 81% of the add-ons used were offered to participants by clinicians (compared to 19% requested by themselves). Half (54%) reported being offered add-ons during consultations, compared to 24% who initiated discussion about add-ons. Higher proportions of private patients reported being offered (90%), requesting (47%) and using (74%) add-ons than those with NHS funding (74%, 29%, 52%, respectively). The main limitations of this study are the small sample size, recruitment via a convenience sample, and the self-reported data capture which is subject to recall bias.


Assuntos
Fertilização in vitro , Pacientes , Relações Médico-Paciente , Feminino , Humanos , Fertilização in vitro/métodos , Fertilização in vitro/estatística & dados numéricos , Reino Unido , Pacientes/psicologia , Pacientes/estatística & dados numéricos , Clínicas de Fertilização , Pesquisas sobre Atenção à Saúde , Masculino , Adulto
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...