Evaluation of an effective multifaceted implementation strategy for elective single-embryo transfer after in vitro fertilization

Human Reproduction

Volumn 28, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 336-342

  Kreuwel, I A M ^a   Van Peperstraten, A M ^a   Hulscher, M E J L ^a   Kremer, J A M ^a   Grol, R P T M ^a   Nelen, W L D M ^a   Hermens, R P M G ^a  

^a RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

implementation strategy; in vitro fertilization; shared decision making; single embryo transfer

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; CLINICAL EVALUATION; DISEASE DURATION; ELECTIVE SINGLE EMBRYO TRANSFER; EMBRYO TRANSFER; FEMALE; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL PARAMETERS; MULTIFACETED IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; PATIENT COUNSELING; PHYSICIAN; QUESTIONNAIRE; REIMBURSEMENT; SUBFERTILITY; TELECONSULTATION;

EID: 84872587022     PISSN: 02681161     EISSN: 14602350     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/humrep/des371     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. de Mouzon J, Goossens V, Bhattacharya S, Castilla JA, Ferraretti AP, Korsak V, Kupka M, Nygren KG, Nyboe AA. Assisted reproductive technology in Europe, 2006: results generated from European registers by ESHRE. Hum Reprod 2010;25: 1851-1862.
2. de Mouzon J, Goossens V, Bhattacharya S, Castilla JA, Ferraretti AP, Korsak V, Kupka M, Nygren KG, Andersen AN. Assisted reproductive technology in Europe, 2007: results generated from European registers by ESHRE. Hum Reprod 2012;27: 954-966.
3. Grimshaw JM, Thomas RE, MacLennan G, Fraser C, Ramsay CR, Vale L, Whitty P, Eccles MP, Matowe L, Shirran L et al. Effectiveness and efficiency of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies. Health Technol Assess 2004;8: 1-72.
4. Grol R, Wensing M, Eccles M et al. Improving Patient Care, 1st edn. Butterscotch-Heinemann, 2005.
5. Hermens RP, Hak E, Hulscher ME, Braspenning JC, Grol RP. Adherence to guidelines on cervical cancer screening in general practice: programme elements of successful implementation. Br J Gen Pract 2001;51: 897-903.
6. Helmerhorst FM, Perquin DA, Donker D, Keirse MJ. Perinatal outcome of singletons and twins after assisted conception: a systematic review of controlled studies. Br Med J 2004;328: 261-264.
7. Hulscher ME, Laurant MG, Grol RP. Process evaluation on quality improvement interventions. Qual Saf Health Care 2003;12: 40-46.
8. Jain T, Harlow BL, Hornstein MD. Insurance coverage and outcomes of in vitro fertilization. N Engl J Med 2002;347: 661-666.
9. Kremer JA, Bots RS, Cohlen B, Crooij M, van Dop PA, Jansen CA, Land JA, Laven JS, Kastrop PM, Naaktgeboren N et al. [Ten years of results of in-vitro fertilisation in the Netherlands 1996-2005]. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 2008;152: 146-152.
10. Lukassen HG, Schonbeck Y, Adang EM, Braat DD, Zielhuis GA, Kremer JA. Cost analysis of singleton versus twin pregnancies after in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 2004;81: 1240-1246.
11. Lukassen HG, Braat DD, Wetzels AM, Zielhuis GA, Adang EM, Scheenjes E, Kremer JA. Two cycles with single embryo transfer versus one cycle with double embryo transfer: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod 2005;20: 702-708.
12. Martin PM,Welch HG. Probabilities for singleton and multiple pregnancies after in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 1998;70: 478-481.
13. McLernon DJ, Harrild K, Bergh C, Davies MJ, De ND, Dumoulin JC, Gerris J, Kremer JA, Martikainen H, Mol BWet al. Clinical effectiveness of elective single versus double embryo transfer: meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomised trials. Br Med J 2010;341: c6945.
14. Mourad SM, Hermens RP, Liefers J, Akkermans RP, Zielhuis GA, Adang E, Grol RP, Nelen WL, Kremer JA. A multi-faceted strategy to improve the use of national fertility guidelines: a cluster-randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod 2011;26: 817-826.
15. Pandian Z, Templeton A, Serour G, Bhattacharya S. Number of embryos for transfer after IVF and ICSI: a Cochrane review. Hum Reprod 2005; 20: 2681-2687.
16. Pinborg A. IVF/ICSI twin pregnancies: risks and prevention. Hum Reprod Update 2005;11: 575-593.
17. Reynolds MA, Schieve LA, Jeng G, Peterson HB. Does insurance coverage decrease the risk for multiple births associated with assisted reproductive technology? Fertil Steril 2003;80: 16-23.
18. Thurin A, Hausken J, Hillensjo T, Jablonowska B, Pinborg A, Strandell A, Bergh C. Elective single-embryo transfer versus double-embryo transfer in in vitro fertilization. N Engl J Med 2004;351: 2392-2402.
19. van Montfoort AP, Fiddelers AA, Janssen JM, Derhaag JG, Dirksen CD, Dunselman GA, Land JA, Geraedts JP, Evers JL, Dumoulin JC. In unselected patients, elective single embryo transfer prevents all multiples, but results in significantly lower pregnancy rates compared with double embryo transfer: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod 2006;21: 338-343.
20. van Peperstraten AM, Hermens RP, Nelen WL, Stalmeier PF, Scheffer GJ, Grol RP, Kremer JA. Perceived barriers to elective single embryo transfer among IVF professionals: a national survey. Hum Reprod 2008a;23: 2718-2723.
21. van Peperstraten AM, Nelen WL, Hermens RP, Jansen L, Scheenjes E, Braat DD, Grol RP, Kremer JA. Why don't we perform elective single embryo transfer? A qualitative study among IVF patients and professionals. Hum Reprod 2008b;23: 2036-2042.
22. van Peperstraten A, Nelen W, Grol R, Zielhuis G, Adang E, Stalmeier P, Hermens R, Kremer J. The effect of a multifaceted empowerment strategy on decision making about the number of embryos transferred in in vitro fertilisation: randomised controlled trial. Br Med J 2010;341: c2501.
23. Wolner-Hanssen P, Rydhstroem H. Cost-effectiveness analysis of in-vitro fertilization: estimated costs per successful pregnancy after transfer of one or two embryos. Hum Reprod 1998;13: 88-94.