Gamete donors' satisfaction; gender differences and similarities among oocyte and sperm donors in a national sample

ObjectiveTo explore oocyte and sperm donors' emotional stress, experiences of care and satisfaction after donation. DesignProspective multicenter study. SettingsAll fertility clinics performing gamete donation in Sweden during the period 2005 to 2008. PopulationOf 220 eligible oocyte donors who were approached, 181 agreed to complete the first questionnaire and 165 completed the second questionnaire 2 months after oocyte donation. Of 156 eligible sperm donors 119 accepted to complete the first questionnaire before donation. Eighty-nine participants completed the second questionnaire 2 months after sperm donation. MethodsStandardized and study-specific questionnaires. Main outcome measuresSatisfaction with the donation, respondents' mental health and overall care. ResultsA larger percentage of sperm donors (97.8%) were satisfied with their overall experience of being a donor than oocyte donors (85.9%, p = 0.003). Some oocyte and sperm donors did not receive sufficient information about practical issues (9.1% and 13.5%, respectively) and future consequences (12.8% and 3.4%, respectively, p = 0.014). The donors' symptoms of anxiety and depression did not show any differences in relation to negative or positive perceptions of satisfaction. The donors who did not indicate ambivalence before treatment were on average almost five times more satisfied compared with those who did indicate ambivalence (odds ratio 4.71; 95% CI 1.34–16.51). ConclusionsMost donors were satisfied with their contribution after the donation. Oocyte and sperm donors who expressed ambivalence before donation were less satisfied after donation. In vitro fertilization staff fulfilled most of the donors' needs for information and care. Please cite this article as: Skoog Svanberg A, Lampic C, Gejerwall A-L, Gudmundsson J, Karlström P-O, Solensten N-G, Sydsjö G. Gamete donors’ satisfaction; gender differences and similarities among oocyte and sperm donors in a national sample. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2013; 92:1049–1056.