BACKGROUND: The present trend towards low stimulation protocols in IVF calls for evaluation of patient attitudes. METHODS: This study compared results of a 23-item questionnaire mailed to 167 patients receiving a low stimulation type of regimen (LS-IVF) (unstimulated cycle or clomiphene) and to 116 patients treated by a standard protocol (S-IVF) (long-down regulation with gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogue and FSH or human menopausal gonadotrophin). RESULTS: Around two-thirds of all responders in both groups deemed side-effects important, but side-effects and stress associated with hormone treatment were more prevalent in patients receiving S-IVF than LS-IVF. Stress due to cycle cancellation was acceptable, mild or not perceptible in significantly (P < 0.005) more patients receiving LS-IVF [48% (36/75)] compared with patients having S-IVF [26% (8/31)]. Of patients having tried the LS-IVF protocol, 93% (125/135) would suggest either LS-IVF or a sequence of this and S-IVF as a future treatment "package" compared with only 53% (33/63) in the S-IVF group (chi(2) = 43.08, P < 0.0001). The LS-IVF group showed a significant trend towards acceptance of higher number of treatment cycles. CONCLUSIONS: The patients seemed to prefer the simplicity and short duration of a low stimulation regimen in spite of drawbacks such as a high risk of cycle cancellations and accordingly the necessity for more treatment cycles.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Astrid Ditte Højgaard (2001) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: