A randomized comparison of alternative methods of information provision on the acceptability of elective single embryo transfer.
BACKGROUND
The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of alternative ways of providing information about the risks of twins on couples' perceptions about elective single embryo transfer (eSET).


METHODS
Couples undergoing IVF were randomized into three groups. Group 1 received a standard information pack, group 2 an extra information leaflet about twin pregnancy, and group 3 an additional discussion session. The primary outcome measure was acceptability of a hypothetical policy of eSET. Data were collected by means of a questionnaire.


RESULTS
eSET was acceptable to 17 (27%), 20 (30%) and 24 (32%) couples in groups 1, 2 and 3, if it meant a slight reduction in pregnancy rates, and to 51 (82%), 55 (83%) and 53 (87%) couples, respectively, if pregnancy rates were unchanged. A fixed charge for all fresh and frozen embryo transfers following a single oocyte retrieval led to acceptability rates of 35 (57%), 36 (55%) and 38 (65%).


CONCLUSIONS
Additional information, involving an extra information leaflet and face to face discussion, did not changes couples' attitudes towards eSET. Maintaining existing rates of pregnancy and offering a fixed charge for all embryo transfers resulting from an oocyte recovery may encourage more couples to consider eSET.
Aberdeen Fertility Centre, Aberdeen Maternity Hospital, Foresterhill, Aberdeen AB25 2ZL, UK.
S
S
Murray
A
A
Shetty
A
A
Rattray
V
V
Taylor
S
S
Bhattacharya
D004624:Embryo Transfer / Q000191:economics; D005249:Fees and Charges; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D010342:Patient Acceptance of Health Care; D010353:Patient Education as Topic / Q000379:methods*; D011247:Pregnancy; D018873:Pregnancy Rate; D011272:Pregnancy, Multiple; D012307:Risk Factors; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D014427:Twins