Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 11 de 11
Filter
2.
Fertil Steril ; 117(1): 15-21, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34753600

ABSTRACT

When a diverse group of individuals is working together in the contemporary fertility clinic to provide time-sensitive and complex care for patients, a high degree of coordination and collaboration must take place. When performed dynamically, this process is referred to as teaming. Although the positive impact of teamwork in health care settings has been well established in the literature, the concept of teaming has limited foundation in the clinic. This review will provide an overview of how teaming can be used to improve patient care in today's fertility clinics. Approaches to integrating teaming into the clinic that will be discussed include framing, the creation of a psychologically safe environment for staff input, and facilitating collaborative constructs to support teaming. Best practices to implement teaming and how to address challenges to teaming in today's clinical environment will also be addressed.


Subject(s)
Fertility Clinics , Organizational Culture , Patient Care Team/organization & administration , Ambulatory Care Facilities/organization & administration , Ambulatory Care Facilities/trends , Calibration/standards , Delivery of Health Care/organization & administration , Delivery of Health Care/standards , Delivery of Health Care/trends , Female , Fertility Clinics/organization & administration , Fertility Clinics/trends , Humans , Male , Patient Care/standards , Patient Care/trends , Patient Care Team/standards , Patient Care Team/trends , Precision Medicine/methods , Precision Medicine/trends , Pregnancy
3.
Fertil Steril ; 115(1): 104-109, 2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33069369

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology (SART) member in vitro fertilization (IVF) centers adhere to the Society's new advertising policy, updated in January 2018, and evaluate other services advertised by region, insurance mandate and university affiliation status. Historically, a large percentage of IVF clinics have not adhered to SART guidelines for IVF clinic website advertising and have had variability in how financial incentives and other noncore fertility services are advertised. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Not applicable. PATIENT(S): None. INTERVENTION(S): None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Adherence of SART participating websites to objective criteria from the 2018 SART advertising guidelines. RESULT(S): All 361 SART participating clinic websites were evaluated. Approximately one third of clinics reported success rate statistics directly on their websites, but only 52.6% of those clinics reported current statistics. Similarly, only 67.5% of SART member clinics included the required disclaimer statement regarding their outcome statistics. Only 10.5% of websites were wholly compliant with SART guidelines regarding presentation of supplemental data. There were no significant differences between academic and nonacademic centers, programs in mandated versus nonmandated states, or East versus West Coast clinics in any of these areas. CONCLUSION(S): Many of the SART member websites failed to adhere to core guidelines surrounding reporting IVF clinic success rates. Consideration for additional education and streamlining as well as simplifying success rate advertising guidelines is recommended.


Subject(s)
Advertising/standards , Fertility Clinics , Guideline Adherence , Reproductive Techniques, Assisted , Societies, Medical/standards , Ambulatory Care Facilities/economics , Ambulatory Care Facilities/organization & administration , Ambulatory Care Facilities/standards , Ambulatory Care Facilities/statistics & numerical data , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Fertility Clinics/economics , Fertility Clinics/organization & administration , Fertility Clinics/standards , Fertility Clinics/statistics & numerical data , Fertilization in Vitro/economics , Fertilization in Vitro/standards , Fertilization in Vitro/statistics & numerical data , Guideline Adherence/statistics & numerical data , Guideline Adherence/trends , Humans , Internet/economics , Internet/standards , Internet/statistics & numerical data , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Rate , Reproductive Techniques, Assisted/economics , Reproductive Techniques, Assisted/standards , Reproductive Techniques, Assisted/statistics & numerical data , Societies, Medical/organization & administration , Societies, Medical/statistics & numerical data , United States
4.
Fertil Steril ; 115(1): 180-190, 2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33272617

ABSTRACT

STUDY QUESTION: Can the priorities for future research in infertility be identified? SUMMARY ANSWER: The top 10 research priorities for the four areas of male infertility, female and unexplained infertility, medically assisted reproduction, and ethics, access, and organization of care for people with fertility problems were identified. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Many fundamental questions regarding the prevention, management, and consequences of infertility remain unanswered. This is a barrier to improving the care received by those people with fertility problems. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Potential research questions were collated from an initial international survey, a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines, and Cochrane systematic reviews. A rationalized list of confirmed research uncertainties was prioritized in an interim international survey. Prioritized research uncertainties were discussed during a consensus development meeting. Using a formal consensus development method, the modified nominal group technique, diverse stakeholders identified the top 10 research priorities for each of the categories male infertility, female and unexplained infertility, medically assisted reproduction, and ethics, access, and organization of care. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Healthcare professionals, people with fertility problems, and others (healthcare funders, healthcare providers, healthcare regulators, research funding bodies and researchers) were brought together in an open and transparent process using formal consensus methods advocated by the James Lind Alliance. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The initial survey was completed by 388 participants from 40 countries, and 423 potential research questions were submitted. Fourteen clinical practice guidelines and 162 Cochrane systematic reviews identified a further 236 potential research questions. A rationalized list of 231 confirmed research uncertainties were entered into an interim prioritization survey completed by 317 respondents from 43 countries. The top 10 research priorities for each of the four categories male infertility, female and unexplained infertility (including age-related infertility, ovarian cysts, uterine cavity abnormalities, and tubal factor infertility), medically assisted reproduction (including ovarian stimulation, IUI, and IVF), and ethics, access, and organization of care, were identified during a consensus development meeting involving 41 participants from 11 countries. These research priorities were diverse and seek answers to questions regarding prevention, treatment, and the longer-term impact of infertility. They highlight the importance of pursuing research which has often been overlooked, including addressing the emotional and psychological impact of infertility, improving access to fertility treatment, particularly in lower resource settings, and securing appropriate regulation. Addressing these priorities will require diverse research methodologies, including laboratory-based science, qualitative and quantitative research, and population science. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: We used consensus development methods, which have inherent limitations, including the representativeness of the participant sample, methodological decisions informed by professional judgement, and arbitrary consensus definitions. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: We anticipate that identified research priorities, developed to specifically highlight the most pressing clinical needs as perceived by healthcare professionals, people with fertility problems, and others, will help research funding organizations and researchers to develop their future research agenda. STUDY FUNDING/ COMPETING INTEREST(S): The study was funded by the Auckland Medical Research Foundation, Catalyst Fund, Royal Society of New Zealand, and Maurice and Phyllis Paykel Trust. Geoffrey Adamson reports research sponsorship from Abbott, personal fees from Abbott and LabCorp, a financial interest in Advanced Reproductive Care, committee membership of the FIGO Committee on Reproductive Medicine, International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies, International Federation of Fertility Societies, and World Endometriosis Research Foundation, and research sponsorship of the International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies from Abbott and Ferring. Siladitya Bhattacharya reports being the Editor-in-Chief of Human Reproduction Open and editor for the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group. Hans Evers reports being the Editor Emeritus of Human Reproduction. Andrew Horne reports research sponsorship from the Chief Scientist's Office, Ferring, Medical Research Council, National Institute for Health Research, and Wellbeing of Women and consultancy fees from Abbvie, Ferring, Nordic Pharma, and Roche Diagnostics. M. Louise Hull reports grants from Merck, grants from Myovant, grants from Bayer, outside the submitted work and ownership in Embrace Fertility, a private fertility company. Neil Johnson reports research sponsorship from Abb-Vie and Myovant Sciences and consultancy fees from Guerbet, Myovant Sciences, Roche Diagnostics, and Vifor Pharma. José Knijnenburg reports research sponsorship from Ferring and Theramex. Richard Legro reports consultancy fees from Abbvie, Bayer, Ferring, Fractyl, Insud Pharma and Kindex and research sponsorship from Guerbet and Hass Avocado Board. Ben Mol reports consultancy fees from Guerbet, iGenomix, Merck, Merck KGaA and ObsEva. Ernest Ng reports research sponsorship from Merck. Craig Niederberger reports being the Co Editor-in-Chief of Fertility and Sterility and Section Editor of the Journal of Urology, research sponsorship from Ferring, and retains a financial interest in NexHand. Jane Stewart reports being employed by a National Health Service fertility clinic, consultancy fees from Merck for educational events, sponsorship to attend a fertility conference from Ferring, and being a clinical subeditor of Human Fertility. Annika Strandell reports consultancy fees from Guerbet. Jack Wilkinson reports being a statistical editor for the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group. Andy Vail reports that he is a Statistical Editor of the Cochrane Gynaecology & Fertility Review Group and of the journal Reproduction. His employing institution has received payment from HFEA for his advice on review of research evidence to inform their 'traffic light' system for infertility treatment 'add-ons'. Lan Vuong reports consultancy and conference fees from Ferring, Merck and Merck Sharp and Dohme. The remaining authors declare no competing interests in relation to the present work. All authors have completed the disclosure form. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Not applicable.


Subject(s)
Infertility , Reproductive Medicine/trends , Research/trends , Consensus , Delphi Technique , Female , Fertility Clinics/organization & administration , Fertility Clinics/standards , Fertility Clinics/trends , Humans , Infertility/etiology , Infertility/therapy , International Cooperation , Male , Practice Guidelines as Topic/standards , Pregnancy , Reproductive Medicine/organization & administration , Reproductive Medicine/standards , Research/organization & administration , Research/standards
5.
Reprod Biomed Online ; 41(2): 141-150, 2020 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32622702

ABSTRACT

Fertility societies worldwide responded to the COVID-19 pandemic by recommending that fertility clinics close, or sharply reduce, the clinical operation, leading to a shift in the management of IVF laboratories in three phases: shutdown preparation; maintenance during shutdown; and restart. Each of these phases carries distinct risks that need identification and mitigation, forcing laboratory managers to rethink and adapt their procedures in response to the pandemic. The sudden and unprecedented nature of the pandemic forced laboratory managers from around the world to base decisions on opinion and experience when evidence-based response options were unavailable. These perspectives on pandemic response were presented during a virtual international symposium on COVID-19, held on 3 April 2020, and organized by the London Laboratory Managers' Group. Laboratory managers from seven different countries at different stages of the pandemic (China, Italy, Spain, France, UK, Brazil and Australia) presented their personal experiences to a select audience of experienced laboratory managers from 19 different countries. The intention of this paper is to collect the learnings and considerations from this group of laboratory managers who collaborated to share personal experiences to contribute to the debate surrounding what constitutes good IVF laboratory practice in extraordinary circumstances, such as the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Fertility Clinics/organization & administration , Fertilization in Vitro/methods , Internationality , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Australia/epidemiology , Brazil/epidemiology , COVID-19 , China/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Female , Fertility Clinics/statistics & numerical data , Fertilization in Vitro/statistics & numerical data , France/epidemiology , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Spain/epidemiology , Standard of Care , United Kingdom/epidemiology
6.
Fertil Steril ; 114(1): 9-15, 2020 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32532495

ABSTRACT

The laboratory is the heart of an in vitro fertilization (IVF) clinic, and a quality management system is critical for its administration. We review the main structural, process, and outcome key performance indicators (KPIs) to provide laboratory managers with concrete tools aimed at enhancing the quality of their work. Three concepts must be stressed when dealing with KPIs in IVF: [1] always consider the three types of indicators (structural, process, and outcome related), [2] carefully adapt the control chart to either promptly identify issues and adopt corrective measures, or redefine the control limits in a process called "progress building," [3] consider that achieving a healthy live birth is a multidisciplinary effort that is subject to several confounders, which must be recognized and accounted for in the analyses. In this regard, future KPIs shared among clinicians and embryologists are desirable to enhance the quality of infertility care for IVF patients.


Subject(s)
Clinical Laboratory Techniques/standards , Fertilization in Vitro , Laboratories/organization & administration , Laboratories/standards , Quality Indicators, Health Care , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/methods , Female , Fertility Clinics/organization & administration , Fertility Clinics/standards , Fertilization in Vitro/methods , Humans , Infertility/therapy , Pregnancy , Program Evaluation
7.
Fertil Steril ; 114(1): 4-5, 2020 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32532497

ABSTRACT

Assisted reproductive technology (ART) has been so widely deployed across the world that over 1% of all births are now ART babies, with even higher percentages in the Nordic countries. As pregnancy rates are limited by technical, population, and inherent limitations of human reproduction, key performance indicators should be defined for all the different facets of ART to measure the efficacy of the procedure.


Subject(s)
Infertility/diagnosis , Infertility/therapy , Quality Indicators, Health Care , Reproductive Techniques, Assisted/standards , Clinical Laboratory Services/organization & administration , Clinical Laboratory Services/standards , Embryo Culture Techniques/methods , Embryo Culture Techniques/standards , Female , Fertility Clinics/organization & administration , Fertility Clinics/standards , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Pregnancy , Preimplantation Diagnosis/methods , Preimplantation Diagnosis/standards , Quality Control , Treatment Outcome
8.
J Nurs Res ; 28(3): e95, 2020 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32084045

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Stress has a negative impact on fertility by suppressing the secretion of fertility hormones. Although it is known that stress reduces the probability of conception and affects fertility negatively, scales that are now widely used to evaluate fertility preparedness include negative items. Positive statements are crucial to relieving stress in women. Using positive items in assessments of fertility preparedness in women may help reduce related stress. PURPOSE: This study was designed to develop the Fertility Preparedness Scale for women receiving fertility treatments. METHODS: A methodological study was conducted in four fertility clinics between December 2015 and March 2016. Two hundred thirty women who had been diagnosed with primary or secondary infertility were enrolled as participants. A personal information form and the Fertility Preparedness Scale were used to collect data. RESULTS: The Cronbach's alpha was .84 for the total scale and .76-.79 for the subscales. Factor analysis extracted three subscales that explained 52.93% of the total variance. The confirmatory factor analysis found a goodness of fit index of .80, a comparative fit index of .95, and a nonnormed fit index of .94. CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This scale is valid and reliable for measuring the fertility preparedness of women who receive fertility treatment.


Subject(s)
Fertility , Program Development/methods , Psychometrics/instrumentation , Adult , Female , Fertility Clinics/organization & administration , Humans , Psychometrics/methods , Reproducibility of Results , Surveys and Questionnaires
9.
Matern Child Health J ; 23(11): 1508-1515, 2019 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31228145

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Standard survey measures of fertility preferences, such as the desire for and preferred timing of future births, do not capture the complexity of individuals' preferences. New research focuses on additional dimensions of emotions and expectations surrounding childbearing. Few quantitative studies, however, consider the influence of all three dimensions of fertility preferences concurrently. METHODS: Using longitudinal survey data from the Tsogolo la Thanzi project (2009-2012) in Malawi, this study employed logistic regression analysis to investigate the influence of young women's emotions, expectations, and a standard measure of fertility preferences on pregnancy and modern contraceptive use. RESULTS: Young women experienced high unmet need; across survey waves, over three-quarters of women who desired a child in more than 2 years were not currently using modern contraceptives and over three-quarters of women who thought a pregnancy in the next month would be bad news (garnered from a measure of emotions surrounding pregnancy) were not currently using modern contraceptives. In regression models including all three measures of fertility preferences, each was significantly associated with the likelihood of a future pregnancy. The standard measure and emotions measure were significantly associated with modern contraceptive use. DISCUSSION: Emotions and expectations surrounding pregnancy and childbirth appear to be distinct and salient aspects of fertility preferences in addition to the standard measure. A better understanding of the multidimensional nature of fertility preferences will help individuals define and achieve their reproductive goals and obtain appropriate services. Furthermore, future research should incorporate new measures of fertility preferences into surveys internationally.


Subject(s)
Family Planning Services/methods , Adolescent , Family Planning Services/statistics & numerical data , Female , Fertility , Fertility Clinics/organization & administration , Fertility Clinics/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Malawi , Socioeconomic Factors , Young Adult
10.
J Obstet Gynaecol Can ; 41(6): 755-761, 2019 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30642817

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Patients receiving fertility treatments require near-daily blood work and ultrasound for cycle monitoring. Patient volumes at an academic hospital-based ambulatory clinic were expected to increase with expanded provincial funding. The aim of this quality improvement project was for 85% of cycle monitoring patients to have a turnaround time (TAT) of 20 minutes or less from arrival until checkout. METHODS: This is a time series study analyzed with statistical process control methodology. A baseline survey was conducted to understand patient priorities. Multiple site-specific change ideas were developed by front-line staff using lean methodology including standard processes, standard work, supportive tools, visual management, and staffing and scheduling to meet Takt time. Patient and staff satisfaction surveys were conducted after implementation (Canadian Task Force Classification II-2). RESULTS: With the start of funding in December 2015 the clinic accommodated a 17% increase in daily patient volumes and increased the proportion of patients receiving education at each visit from 50% to 100%. Despite increased patient volumes and added education time, the control chart showed special cause variation with decreased TATs from 38.2 to 34.7 minutes. Patient surveys showed that their priorities were being met or exceeded, and all staff reported increased satisfaction with the new process. CONCLUSION: By using lean methodology in an ambulatory fertility setting, the clinic was able to improve efficiency in the morning monitoring process to decrease patient TATs while accommodating increased patient volumes and improving the quality of patient care.


Subject(s)
Ambulatory Care/organization & administration , Appointments and Schedules , Fertility Clinics/organization & administration , Patient Education as Topic , Personnel Staffing and Scheduling , Phlebotomy , Total Quality Management , Ultrasonography , Academic Medical Centers , Attitude of Health Personnel , Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Efficiency, Organizational , Female , Healthcare Financing , Humans , Ontario , Patient Satisfaction , Quality Improvement , Quality of Health Care
11.
J Med Ethics ; 45(2): 112-116, 2019 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30530762

ABSTRACT

Assisted reproduction using donor gametes is a procedure that allows those who are unable to produce their own gametes to achieve gestational parenthood. Where conception is achieved using donor sperm, the child lacks a genetic link to the intended father. Where it is achieved using a donor egg, the child lacks a genetic link to the intended mother. To address this lack of genetic kinship, some fertility clinics engage in the practice of matching the ethnicity of the gamete donor to that of the recipient parent. The intended result is for the child to have the phenotypic characteristics of the recipient parents. This paper examines the philosophical and ethical problems raised by the policy of ethnic matching in gamete donation. I consider arguments for the provision of ethnic matching based on maximising physical resemblance and fostering ethnic identity development. I then consider an argument against ethnic matching based on the charge of racialism. I conclude that while the practice of ethnic matching in gamete donation could promote positive ethnic identity development in donor-conceived children from historically subjugated ethnic minorities, it also risks endorsing the problematic societal attitudes and assumptions regarding ethnicity that enabled such subjugation in the first place.


Subject(s)
Directed Tissue Donation/ethics , Ethnicity , Reproductive Techniques, Assisted/ethics , Female , Fertility Clinics/ethics , Fertility Clinics/organization & administration , Humans , Male , Organizational Policy , Racial Groups , Racism/ethics , Social Identification
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...