Systematic review synthesizes women's experiences of spontaneous premature ovarian insufficiency, highlighting emotional and social challenges.
OBJECTIVES: Spontaneous premature ovarian insufficiency (POI) is a condition characterized by the cessation of ovarian function before age 40, unrelated to medical interventions. It affects approximately 3.5% of women worldwide and can result in significant emotional, physical, and social consequences. Despite clinical advancements in understanding POI, women's lived experiences remain underexplored, particularly the impact of early reproductive aging that conflicts with their chronological youth. This study aims to synthesize qualitative evidence on women's experiences of spontaneous POI, focusing on emotional, physical, social, and diagnostic challenges, as well as coping strategies. METHOD: A comprehensive search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, CINAHL, and PsycINFO from inception to January 2026, with studies screened independently by two reviewers using predefined criteria. Included studies employed qualitative methodologies, were peer-reviewed, and were published in English. Studies on iatrogenic POI or using mixed/quantitative methods were excluded. Participant characteristics were extracted using an adapted Cochrane data collection form. Two researchers independently performed line-by-line coding using Dedoose software, resolving discrepancies via team discussion. Themes were developed through inductive analysis. RESULTS: Thirteen studies involving 389 women revealed five key themes: (1) Emotional and psychological impact; (2) Physical and embodied experiences; (3) Social and relational challenges; (4) Diagnostic and treatment challenges; and (5) Coping and adaptation. CONCLUSION: Spontaneous POI profoundly affects women biopsychosocially, beyond reproductive loss. Clinical practice must shift toward woman-centered care, integrating emotional support, timely diagnosis, and culturally sensitive interventions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rada et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: