Journal of Reproduction & Infertility

Journal of Reproduction & Infertility

The Experience of Dutch Women Using a Coping Intervention for Oocyte Retrieval: A Qualitative Study

Authors
Henrietta D.L. Ockhuijsen 1
Ida Ophorst 2
Agnes Van Den Hoogen 3
1 Department of Reproductive Medicine and Gynaecology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherland
2 Department of Children, Princes Maxima Centre and University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherland
3 Department of Neonatology, Wilhelmina Children's Hospital and University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherland
Abstract
Background: Many women experience oocyte retrieval during an IVF treatment as a stressful and emotionally difficult situation. Women fear the pain as associated with oocyte retrieval. Based on the existing literature, a coping intervention for oocyte retrieval (CIFOR) was developed to deal with the stress and pain during oocyte retrieval. The objective of this study was to explore the experiences of women using coping intervention for oocyte retrieval (CIFOR) while undergoing oocyte retrieval. Methods: For this generic qualitative study, a purposeful sample of fifteen women was gathered from a university clinic in the Netherlands and each participant was interviewed. Background information about the IVF treatment was collected from medical files. Semi-structured interviews were performed approximately 15 min after the OR procedure. Data were analyzed using the Qualitative Analysis Guide of Leuven and processed using MAXQDA. Results: Twenty-five women were approached for this study between January and May 2018. This study identified five themes that were important in the experiences of women using CIFOR: highly valuing the CIFOR, feasible in daily practice, need for information, sense of control and partner’s involvement. Conclusion: Women highly valued the tool. They found CIFOR feasible in daily practice and it fulfilled their needs for information. In addition, women had a sense of control using the intervention. Future research will involve performing a pilot study according to the Medical Research Council framework with outcomes based on the patient’s sense of control, ability to cope, coping strategies, anxiety and pain.
Keywords
anxiety
early intervention
fertilization in vitro
Oocyte retrieval
Pain
Psychological adaptation
  1. World Health Organization. Sexual and reproductive health. Geneva: World Health Organization. 2012. Global prevalence of infertility, infecundity and childlessness. [cited 2020]; [about 1 screen]. Available from: http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/topics/infertility/burden/en.
  2. Van Asselt KM, Hinloopen RJ, Silvius AM, Van der Linden PJQ, Van Oppen CCAN, Van Balen JAM. NHG-Standaard Subfertiliteit [Internet]. Nederland: Nederland huisartsen genootschap. 2010 [cited 2020]; [about 3screen]. Available from: https://richtlijnen.nhg.org/standaarden/subfertiliteit#volledige-tekst.
  3. European society of human reproduction and embryology. Workshops, symposia and training courses. Grimbergen, Belgium: ESHRE publication. Available from: https://www.eshre.eu/Publications/Textbooks-and-lecture-handouts.aspx.
  4. Frederiksen Y, Mehlsen MY, Matthiesen SMS, Zachariae R, Ingerslev HJ. Predictors of pain during oocyte retrieval. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2017;38(1):21-9.
  5. Gejervall AL, Stener-Victorin E, Cerne A, Borg K, Bergh C. Pain aspects in oocyte aspiration for IVF. Reprod Biomed Online. 2007;14(2):184-90.
  6. Stener-Victorin E. The pain-relieving effect of electro-acupuncture and conventional medical analgesic methods during oocyte retrieval: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Hum Reprod. 2005;20(2):339-49.
  7. Kwan I, Wang R, Pearce E, Bhattacharya S. Pain relief for women undergoing oocyte retrieval for assisted reproduction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;5(5):CD004829.
  8. Cheung CWC, Yee AWW, Chan PS, Saravelos SH, Chung JPW, Cheung LP, et al. The impact of music therapy on pain and stress reduction during oocyte retrieval-a randomized controlled trial. Reprod Biomed Online. 2018;37(2):145-52.
  9. Newton, CR. Assisting patients to manage oocyte retrieval: American Society for reproductive Medicine. Presentation Post graduate Program Denver; 2010.
  10. Lazarus RS, Folkman S. Stress, appraisal, and coping. 1st ed. New York: Springer; 2006. 376 p.
  11. Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Michie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M, et al. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new medical research council guidance. BMJ. 2008;29;337:a1655.
  12. Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Michie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new medical research council guidance. Int J Nurs Stud. 2013;50(5):587-92.
  13. Bleijenberg N, de Man-van Ginkel JM, Trappenburg JCA, Ettema RGA, Sino CG, Heim N, et al. Increasing value and reducing waste by optimizing the development of complex interventions: enriching the development phase of the medical research council (MRC) framework. Int J Nurs Stud. 2018;79:86-93.
  14. Kahlke RM. Generic qualitative approaches: Pitfalls and benefits of methodological mixology. Int J Qual Methods. 2014;13(1):37-52.
  15. Merriam SB. Qualitative research, a guide to design and implementation. 2nd ed. USA: Jossey-Bass publisher; 2009. 237 p.
  16. Palinkas LA, Horwitz SM, Green CA, Wisdom JP, Duan N, Hoagwood K. Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Adm Policy Ment Health Ment Health. 2015;42(5):533-44.
  17. Fusch PI, Ness LR. Are we there yet? data saturation in qualitative research. Qual Rep. 2015;20(9):1408-16.
  18. de C Williams AC, Craig KD. Updating the definition of pain. Pain. 2016;157(11):2420-3.
  19. Dierckx de Casterle B, Gastmans C, Bryon E, Denier Y. QUAGOL: a guide for qualitative data analysis. Int J Nurs Stud. 2012;49(3):360-71.
  20. Holloway I, Wheeler S. Qualitative research in nursing and healthcare. 3rd ed. 2010. UK: John wiley & sons; 2010. 351 p.
  21. Eldridge S, Bond C, Campbell M, Lancaster G, Thabane L, Hopwell S. Definition and reporting of pilot and feasibility studies. Trials. 2013;14(Suppl 1):O18.
  22. Miller SM. Monitoring versus blunting styles of coping with cancer influence the information patients want and need about their disease. implications for cancer screening and management. Cancer. 1995;76(2):167-77.
  23. van Zuuren FJ, Grypdonck M, Crevits E, Vande Walle C, Defloor T. The effect of an information brochure on patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy: a randomized controlled study. Patient Educ Couns. 2006;64(1-3):173-82.
  24. Folkman S. The Oxford handbook of stress, health, and coping. 1st ed. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press; 2011. 451 p.
  25. Throsby K, Gill R. It’s different for men: Masculinity and IVF. Men Masc. 2004;6(4):330-48.
  26. Herrera F. Men always adopt: Infertility and reproduction from a male perspective. J Fam Issues. 2013;34(8):1059-80.
  27. Schick M, Rösner S, Toth B, Strowitzki T, Wischmann T. Exploring involuntary childlessness in men–a qualitative study assessing quality of life, role aspects and control beliefs in men’s perception of the fertility treatment process. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2016;19(1):32-42.
  28. Ying LY, Wu LH, Loke AY. The experience of chinese couples undergoing in vitro fertilization treatment: Perception of the treatment process and partner support. PLoS One. 2015;10(10):e0139691.
Journal of Reproduction & Infertility
Volume 21, Issue 3
Summer 2020
Pages 207-216