Human Reproduction, Vol. 18, No. 3, 621-627,
March 2003
© 2003 European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology
Attitudes of IVF/ICSI-twin mothers towards twins and single embryo transfer
1 The Fertility Clinic, University of Copenhagen. Rigshospitalet, and 2 Institute of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Panum Institute, Denmark
3 To whom correspondence should be addressed at: The Fertility Clinic, University of Copenhagen, Blegdamsvej 9, DK-2100 Copenhagen Ø, Denmark. e-mail: apinborg{at}rh.dk
BACKGROUND: Our aim was to study attitudes towards twins and single embryo transfer (SET) among IVF/ICSI-twin mothers with 3 to 4-year old children. METHODS: A national survey was conducted by questionnaire (n = 1769). The study population consisted of IVF/ICSI-twin mothers (n = 266), and the two control groups of IVF/ICSI-singleton mothers (n = 764) and non-IVF/ICSI-twin mothers (n = 739), all giving birth in Denmark in 1997. The overall response rate was 81%. RESULTS: More IVF/ICSI-twin mothers (84.7%) preferred twins as their first child compared with IVF/ICSI-singleton mothers (62.3%) and non-IVF twin mothers (60.0%). The IVF/ICSI-twin mothers had a significantly higher wish for twins (OR = 4.4, 95% CI 2.8–6.9) compared with the non-IVF/ICSI-twin mothers. Though relatively few IVF/ICSI-twin mothers (23.4%) and IVF/ICSI-singleton mothers (17.3%) agreed to SET, delivery of a child with very low birth weight (VLBW) (<1500 g) was predictive of high acceptance of SET (OR = 2.9, 95% CI 1.2–6.9). CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that IVF/ICSI-twin mothers have a greater wish for twins compared with non-IVF/ICSI-twin mothers. Despite the fact that only a quarter of IVF/ICSI mothers agreed to SET, delivery of a child with VLBW and hence high morbidity was predictive of high acceptance of SET. The implementation of elective SET requires extensive counselling of the infertile couples and legislation including strict selection criteria may also be used to facilitate this process.
Key words: attitudes/IVF/mothers/single embryo transfer/twins
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  S. Vilska, L. Unkila-Kallio, R.-L. Punamaki, P. Poikkeus, L. Repokari, J. Sinkkonen, A. Tiitinen, and M. Tulppala Mental health of mothers and fathers of twins conceived via assisted reproduction treatment: a 1-year prospective study Hum. Reprod., February 1, 2009; 24(2): 367 - 377. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. A. Roberts, C. T. Fitzgerald, and D. R. Brison Modelling the impact of single embryo transfer in a national health service IVF programme Hum. Reprod., January 1, 2009; 24(1): 122 - 131. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A.M. van Peperstraten, R.P.M.G. Hermens, W.L.D.M. Nelen, P.F.M. Stalmeier, G.J. Scheffer, R.P.T.M. Grol, and J.A.M. Kremer Perceived barriers to elective single embryo transfer among IVF professionals: a national survey Hum. Reprod., December 1, 2008; 23(12): 2718 - 2723. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A.M. van Peperstraten, W.L.D.M. Nelen, R.P.M.G Hermens, L. Jansen, E. Scheenjes, D.D.M. Braat, R.P.T.M. Grol, and J.A.M. Kremer Why don't we perform elective single embryo transfer? A qualitative study among IVF patients and professionals Hum. Reprod., September 1, 2008; 23(9): 2036 - 2042. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 I. Kosmas, J. Van der Elst, P. Devroey, and H. Tournaye Elective single embryo transfer Obstet Gynaecol (Lond), July 1, 2008; 10(3): 163 - 169. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Borkenhagen, E. Brahler, H. Kentenich, and M. Beutel Attitudes of German infertile couples towards multiple births and elective embryo transfer Hum. Reprod., November 1, 2007; 22(11): 2883 - 2887. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. J. Stillman A 47-Year-Old Woman With Fertility Problems Who Desires a Multiple Pregnancy JAMA, February 28, 2007; 297(8): 858 - 867. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. van Wely, M. Twisk, B.W. Mol, and F. van der Veen Is twin pregnancy necessarily an adverse outcome of assisted reproductive technologies? Hum. Reprod., November 1, 2006; 21(11): 2736 - 2738. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. de Klerk, E.M.E.W. Heijnen, N.S. Macklon, H.J. Duivenvoorden, B.C.J.M. Fauser, J. Passchier, and J.A.M. Hunfeld The psychological impact of mild ovarian stimulation combined with single embryo transfer compared with conventional IVF Hum. Reprod., March 1, 2006; 21(3): 721 - 727. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. Pinborg IVF/ICSI twin pregnancies: risks and prevention Hum. Reprod. Update, November 1, 2005; 11(6): 575 - 593. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Blennborn, S. Nilsson, C. Hillervik, and D. Hellberg The couple's decision-making in IVF: one or two embryos at transfer? Hum. Reprod., May 1, 2005; 20(5): 1292 - 1297. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. M.R. Gerris Single embryo transfer and IVF/ICSI outcome: a balanced appraisal Hum. Reprod. Update, March 1, 2005; 11(2): 105 - 121. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. Thurin, J. Hausken, T. Hillensjo, B. Jablonowska, A. Pinborg, A. Strandell, and C. Bergh Elective Single-Embryo Transfer versus Double-Embryo Transfer in in Vitro Fertilization N. Engl. J. Med., December 2, 2004; 351(23): 2392 - 2402. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Bangsboll, A. Pinborg, C. Yding Andersen, and A. Nyboe Andersen Patients' attitudes towards donation of surplus cryopreserved embryos for treatment or research Hum. Reprod., October 1, 2004; 19(10): 2415 - 2419. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
I. E. Messinis and E. Domali What is the most relevant standard of success in assisted reproduction?: Should BESST really be the primary endpoint for assisted reproduction? Hum. Reprod., September 1, 2004; 19(9): 1933 - 1935. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Bhattacharya and A. Templeton What is the most relevant standard of success in assisted reproduction?: Redefining success in the context of elective single embryo transfer: evidence, intuition and financial reality Hum. Reprod., September 1, 2004; 19(9): 1939 - 1942. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Murray, A. Shetty, A. Rattray, V. Taylor, and S. Bhattacharya A randomized comparison of alternative methods of information provision on the acceptability of elective single embryo transfer Hum. Reprod., April 1, 2004; 19(4): 911 - 916. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. J. Child, A. M. Henderson, and S. L. Tan The desire for multiple pregnancy in male and female infertility patients Hum. Reprod., March 1, 2004; 19(3): 558 - 561. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Pinborg, A. Loft, S. Rasmussen, L. Schmidt, J. Langhoff-Roos, G. Greisen, and A. Nyboe Andersen Neonatal outcome in a Danish national cohort of 3438 IVF/ICSI and 10 362 non-IVF/ICSI twins born between 1995 and 2000 Hum. Reprod., February 1, 2004; 19(2): 435 - 441. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|