Cargando…
Fertility preservation training for obstetrics and gynecology fellows: a highly desired but non-standardized experience
BACKGROUND: Despite a large body of data suggesting that delivery of fertility care to cancer patients is inconsistent and frequently insufficient, there is a paucity of literature examining training in fertility preservation for those physicians expected to discuss options or execute therapy. The s...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5496430/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28690863 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40738-017-0036-y |
_version_ | 1783247979842371584 |
---|---|
author | Miller, Elizabeth J. N. Cookingham, Lisa M. Woodruff, Teresa K. Ryan, Ginny L. Summers, Karen M. Kondapalli, Laxmi A. Shah, Divya K. |
author_facet | Miller, Elizabeth J. N. Cookingham, Lisa M. Woodruff, Teresa K. Ryan, Ginny L. Summers, Karen M. Kondapalli, Laxmi A. Shah, Divya K. |
author_sort | Miller, Elizabeth J. N. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Despite a large body of data suggesting that delivery of fertility care to cancer patients is inconsistent and frequently insufficient, there is a paucity of literature examining training in fertility preservation for those physicians expected to discuss options or execute therapy. The study objective was to compare fertility preservation training between Reproductive Endocrinology & Infertility (REI) and Gynecologic Oncology (GYN ONC) fellows and assess the need for additional education in this field. METHODS: A 38-item survey was administered to REI and GYN ONC fellows in the United states in April 2014. Survey items included: 1) Clinical exposure, perceived quality of training, and self-reported knowledge in fertility preservation; 2) an educational needs assessment of desire for additional training in fertility preservation. RESULTS: Seventy-nine responses were received from 137 REI and 160 GYN ONC fellows (response rate 27%). REI fellows reported seeing significantly more fertility preservation patients and rated their training more favorably than GYN ONC fellows (48% of REI fellows versus 7% of GYN ONC fellows rated training as ‘excellent’, p < 0.001). A majority of all fellows felt discussing fertility preservation was ‘very important’ but fellows differed in self-reported ability to counsel patients, with 43% of REI fellows and only 4% of GYN ONC fellows able to counsel patients ‘all the time’ (p = 0.002). Seventy-six percent of all fellows felt more education in fertility preservation was required, and 91% felt it should be a required component of fellowship training. CONCLUSION: Significant variability exists in fertility preservation training for REI and GYN ONC fellows, with the greatest gap seen for GYN ONC fellows, both in perceived quality of fertility preservation training and number of fertility preservation patients seen. A majority of fellows in both disciplines support the idea of a standardized multi-disciplinary curriculum in fertility preservation. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s40738-017-0036-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5496430 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-54964302017-07-07 Fertility preservation training for obstetrics and gynecology fellows: a highly desired but non-standardized experience Miller, Elizabeth J. N. Cookingham, Lisa M. Woodruff, Teresa K. Ryan, Ginny L. Summers, Karen M. Kondapalli, Laxmi A. Shah, Divya K. Fertil Res Pract Research Article BACKGROUND: Despite a large body of data suggesting that delivery of fertility care to cancer patients is inconsistent and frequently insufficient, there is a paucity of literature examining training in fertility preservation for those physicians expected to discuss options or execute therapy. The study objective was to compare fertility preservation training between Reproductive Endocrinology & Infertility (REI) and Gynecologic Oncology (GYN ONC) fellows and assess the need for additional education in this field. METHODS: A 38-item survey was administered to REI and GYN ONC fellows in the United states in April 2014. Survey items included: 1) Clinical exposure, perceived quality of training, and self-reported knowledge in fertility preservation; 2) an educational needs assessment of desire for additional training in fertility preservation. RESULTS: Seventy-nine responses were received from 137 REI and 160 GYN ONC fellows (response rate 27%). REI fellows reported seeing significantly more fertility preservation patients and rated their training more favorably than GYN ONC fellows (48% of REI fellows versus 7% of GYN ONC fellows rated training as ‘excellent’, p < 0.001). A majority of all fellows felt discussing fertility preservation was ‘very important’ but fellows differed in self-reported ability to counsel patients, with 43% of REI fellows and only 4% of GYN ONC fellows able to counsel patients ‘all the time’ (p = 0.002). Seventy-six percent of all fellows felt more education in fertility preservation was required, and 91% felt it should be a required component of fellowship training. CONCLUSION: Significant variability exists in fertility preservation training for REI and GYN ONC fellows, with the greatest gap seen for GYN ONC fellows, both in perceived quality of fertility preservation training and number of fertility preservation patients seen. A majority of fellows in both disciplines support the idea of a standardized multi-disciplinary curriculum in fertility preservation. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s40738-017-0036-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-07-04 /pmc/articles/PMC5496430/ /pubmed/28690863 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40738-017-0036-y Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Miller, Elizabeth J. N. Cookingham, Lisa M. Woodruff, Teresa K. Ryan, Ginny L. Summers, Karen M. Kondapalli, Laxmi A. Shah, Divya K. Fertility preservation training for obstetrics and gynecology fellows: a highly desired but non-standardized experience |
title | Fertility preservation training for obstetrics and gynecology fellows: a highly desired but non-standardized experience |
title_full | Fertility preservation training for obstetrics and gynecology fellows: a highly desired but non-standardized experience |
title_fullStr | Fertility preservation training for obstetrics and gynecology fellows: a highly desired but non-standardized experience |
title_full_unstemmed | Fertility preservation training for obstetrics and gynecology fellows: a highly desired but non-standardized experience |
title_short | Fertility preservation training for obstetrics and gynecology fellows: a highly desired but non-standardized experience |
title_sort | fertility preservation training for obstetrics and gynecology fellows: a highly desired but non-standardized experience |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5496430/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28690863 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40738-017-0036-y |
work_keys_str_mv | AT millerelizabethjn fertilitypreservationtrainingforobstetricsandgynecologyfellowsahighlydesiredbutnonstandardizedexperience AT cookinghamlisam fertilitypreservationtrainingforobstetricsandgynecologyfellowsahighlydesiredbutnonstandardizedexperience AT woodruffteresak fertilitypreservationtrainingforobstetricsandgynecologyfellowsahighlydesiredbutnonstandardizedexperience AT ryanginnyl fertilitypreservationtrainingforobstetricsandgynecologyfellowsahighlydesiredbutnonstandardizedexperience AT summerskarenm fertilitypreservationtrainingforobstetricsandgynecologyfellowsahighlydesiredbutnonstandardizedexperience AT kondapallilaxmia fertilitypreservationtrainingforobstetricsandgynecologyfellowsahighlydesiredbutnonstandardizedexperience AT shahdivyak fertilitypreservationtrainingforobstetricsandgynecologyfellowsahighlydesiredbutnonstandardizedexperience |