Cargando…

Restorative reproductive medicine for infertility in two family medicine clinics in New England, an observational study

BACKGROUND: Restorative reproductive medicine (RRM) seeks to identify and correct underlying causes and factors contributing to infertility and reproductive dysfunction. Many components of RRM are highly suitable for primary care practice. We studied the outcomes amongst couples who received restora...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Stanford, Joseph B., Carpentier, Paul A., Meier, Barbara L., Rollo, Mark, Tingey, Benjamin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8265110/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34233646
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-021-03946-8
_version_ 1783719704069668864
author Stanford, Joseph B.
Carpentier, Paul A.
Meier, Barbara L.
Rollo, Mark
Tingey, Benjamin
author_facet Stanford, Joseph B.
Carpentier, Paul A.
Meier, Barbara L.
Rollo, Mark
Tingey, Benjamin
author_sort Stanford, Joseph B.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Restorative reproductive medicine (RRM) seeks to identify and correct underlying causes and factors contributing to infertility and reproductive dysfunction. Many components of RRM are highly suitable for primary care practice. We studied the outcomes amongst couples who received restorative reproductive medicine treatment for infertility in a primary care setting. METHODS: Two family physicians in Massachusetts trained in a systematic approach to RRM (natural procreative technology, or NaProTechnology) treated couples with infertility. We retrospectively reviewed the characteristics, diagnoses, treatments, and outcomes for all couples treated during the years 1989 to 2014. We compared pregnancy and live birth by clinical characteristics using Kaplan-Meier analysis. We employed the Fleming-Harrington weighted Renyi test or the logrank test to compare the cumulative proportion with pregnancy or with live birth. RESULTS: Among 370 couples beginning treatment for infertility, the mean age was 34.8 years, the mean prior time trying to conceive was 2.7 years, and 27% had a prior live birth. The mean number of diagnoses per couple was 4.9. Treatment components included fertility tracking with the Creighton Model FertilityCare System (80%); medications to enhance cervical mucus production (81%), to stimulate ovulation (62%), or to support the luteal phase (75%); and referral to female laparoscopy by a surgeon specializing in endometriosis (46%). The cumulative live birth rate at 2 years was 29% overall; this was significantly higher for women under age 35 (34%), and for women with body mass index < 25 (40%). There were 2 sets of twins and no higher-order multiple gestations. Of the 63 births with data available, 58 (92%) occurred at term. CONCLUSIONS: Family physicians can provide a RRM approach for infertility to identify underlying causes and promote healthy term live births. Younger women and women with body mass index < 25 are more likely to have a live birth. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12884-021-03946-8.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8265110
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82651102021-07-08 Restorative reproductive medicine for infertility in two family medicine clinics in New England, an observational study Stanford, Joseph B. Carpentier, Paul A. Meier, Barbara L. Rollo, Mark Tingey, Benjamin BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Research Article BACKGROUND: Restorative reproductive medicine (RRM) seeks to identify and correct underlying causes and factors contributing to infertility and reproductive dysfunction. Many components of RRM are highly suitable for primary care practice. We studied the outcomes amongst couples who received restorative reproductive medicine treatment for infertility in a primary care setting. METHODS: Two family physicians in Massachusetts trained in a systematic approach to RRM (natural procreative technology, or NaProTechnology) treated couples with infertility. We retrospectively reviewed the characteristics, diagnoses, treatments, and outcomes for all couples treated during the years 1989 to 2014. We compared pregnancy and live birth by clinical characteristics using Kaplan-Meier analysis. We employed the Fleming-Harrington weighted Renyi test or the logrank test to compare the cumulative proportion with pregnancy or with live birth. RESULTS: Among 370 couples beginning treatment for infertility, the mean age was 34.8 years, the mean prior time trying to conceive was 2.7 years, and 27% had a prior live birth. The mean number of diagnoses per couple was 4.9. Treatment components included fertility tracking with the Creighton Model FertilityCare System (80%); medications to enhance cervical mucus production (81%), to stimulate ovulation (62%), or to support the luteal phase (75%); and referral to female laparoscopy by a surgeon specializing in endometriosis (46%). The cumulative live birth rate at 2 years was 29% overall; this was significantly higher for women under age 35 (34%), and for women with body mass index < 25 (40%). There were 2 sets of twins and no higher-order multiple gestations. Of the 63 births with data available, 58 (92%) occurred at term. CONCLUSIONS: Family physicians can provide a RRM approach for infertility to identify underlying causes and promote healthy term live births. Younger women and women with body mass index < 25 are more likely to have a live birth. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12884-021-03946-8. BioMed Central 2021-07-07 /pmc/articles/PMC8265110/ /pubmed/34233646 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-021-03946-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Stanford, Joseph B.
Carpentier, Paul A.
Meier, Barbara L.
Rollo, Mark
Tingey, Benjamin
Restorative reproductive medicine for infertility in two family medicine clinics in New England, an observational study
title Restorative reproductive medicine for infertility in two family medicine clinics in New England, an observational study
title_full Restorative reproductive medicine for infertility in two family medicine clinics in New England, an observational study
title_fullStr Restorative reproductive medicine for infertility in two family medicine clinics in New England, an observational study
title_full_unstemmed Restorative reproductive medicine for infertility in two family medicine clinics in New England, an observational study
title_short Restorative reproductive medicine for infertility in two family medicine clinics in New England, an observational study
title_sort restorative reproductive medicine for infertility in two family medicine clinics in new england, an observational study
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8265110/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34233646
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-021-03946-8
work_keys_str_mv AT stanfordjosephb restorativereproductivemedicineforinfertilityintwofamilymedicineclinicsinnewenglandanobservationalstudy
AT carpentierpaula restorativereproductivemedicineforinfertilityintwofamilymedicineclinicsinnewenglandanobservationalstudy
AT meierbarbaral restorativereproductivemedicineforinfertilityintwofamilymedicineclinicsinnewenglandanobservationalstudy
AT rollomark restorativereproductivemedicineforinfertilityintwofamilymedicineclinicsinnewenglandanobservationalstudy
AT tingeybenjamin restorativereproductivemedicineforinfertilityintwofamilymedicineclinicsinnewenglandanobservationalstudy