Physical and Sedentary Activities in Association with Reproductive Outcomes among Couples Seeking Infertility Treatment: A Prospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate the association of physical activity (PA) with assisted reproductive technology (ART) treatment and pregnancy outcomes among couples seeking infertility treatment. METHODS: This prospective cohort study was carried out among 128 infertile individuals (64 couples), entering the infertility clinic for ART procedures. Baseline PA (before entering any treatment) was assessed using accelerometry for both women and men. For every couple the infertility treatment outcomes were recorded. RESULTS: The couples that required invasive ART procedures such as in vitro fertilization (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) spent less time in vigorous PA (-73 min/week per couple, woman + man) than those couples who became spontaneously pregnant after entering the study (p = 0.001). We observed no significant associations between the time spent in physical activities and positive pregnancy test or live birth. CONCLUSIONS: Our results do not support a positive nor negative relation between the time the couples spent in physical activities and the chances of getting pregnant or having a baby among patients seeking infertility treatment. However, couples undergoing invasive ART procedures did less vigorous PA than couples that became spontaneously pregnant, suggesting that PA may interfere with their reproductive health.

Maternal physical activity and sedentary behaviour before and during in vitro fertilization treatment: a longitudinal study exploring the associations with controlled ovarian stimulation and pregnancy outcomes.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the association of objectively measured physical activity (PA) and sedentary behaviour before and during in vitro fertilization (IVF) with controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) and pregnancy outcomes. METHODS: This longitudinal study involved 107 infertile women undergoing IVF treatment. PA and sedentary behaviour were measured for 14 consecutive days using accelerometry as follows: (1) before IVF treatment, (2) during IVF at the implantation time, immediately after embryo transfer, and (3) after positive pregnancy test. Total screen time was assessed by questionnaires. COS results were measured as the number of oocytes and embryos obtained, and the study outcomes included positive hCG, clinical pregnancy, and live birth. RESULTS: Compared with baseline activity levels, women significantly reduced their PA and increased sedentary behaviour during IVF (p ≤ 0.001). Higher average PA, light PA, and ratio between breaks in every ≥ 30-min blocks of sedentary time showed positive associations, while sedentary time, number, and time accumulated in blocks of ≥ 30 min of sedentary time associated negatively with oocyte and embryo counts (all p < 0.05). Women with high total screen time during non-work days (≥ 7 h) obtained 4.7 oocytes (p = 0.005) and 2.8 embryos (p = 0.008) less in COS. PA and sedentary behaviour before and during IVF did not affect the positive hCG, clinical pregnancy, and live birth outcomes. CONCLUSION: Our study results suggest that higher time spent in PA and lower time spent in sedentary behaviour before entering assisted reproduction is associated with better COS outcomes, while activity levels before and during IVF do not affect the implantation, pregnancy, and live birth outcomes.