User login
Breast density alone should not prompt supplemental imaging discussions
Breast density should be a factor in assessing breast cancer risk and recommending supplemental imaging, but not the primary factor, according to a study of women who were screened for the disease.
“Counseling strategies that identified women for supplemental imaging based on breast density and BCSC 5-year risk were more efficient compared with strategies based on age and density or density alone,” wrote Karla Kerlikowske, MD, of the Department of Veterans Affairs, and her coauthors. The study was published in JAMA Internal Medicine.
To assess breast cancer risk and strategies for recommending supplemental screening, the researchers assembled a cohort of 638,856 women aged 40 to 74 years who received mammograms at Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) facilities from Jan. 3, 2005, to Dec. 31, 2014. Participants were identified as high risk via combinations of Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) breast density, BCSC 5-year breast cancer risk, and age.
Women with dense breasts made up 47% of those screened, and 60% of those with advanced cancers. Low advanced cancer rates (less than .61 per 1,000 mammograms) occurred in 34.5% of women with dense breasts, while high advanced cancer rates (greater than or equal to .61 cases per 1,000 mammograms) occurred in women with heterogeneously dense breasts and a 5-year risk of 2.5% or higher (6.0% of screened women) and those with extremely dense breasts and a 5-year risk of 1.0% or higher (6.5% of screened women).
In a hypothetical cohort of 100,000 women, supplemental imaging for all 47,012 women with dense breasts would mean a ratio of 1,866 supplemental imaging discussions per potential advanced breast cancer prevented. If imaging was considered based on a combination of density plus BCSC 5-year risk, the number of women screened would be reduced to 12,506 and the ratio would become 1,097 supplemental imaging discussions per potential advanced cancer prevented.
The coauthors acknowledged their study’s limitations, including their lack of ability to determine if women at high risk of advanced cancer would benefit from supplemental screening. In addition, they were unable to evaluate digital breast tomosynthesis outcomes, though they noted that, to their knowledge, “no published evidence indicates that advanced cancer rates differ for digital mammography vs. tomosynthesis according to breast density.”
The study was funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium, the National Cancer Institute, the Agency for Health Research and Quality, and the Lake Champlain Cancer Research Organization. The authors reported several potential conflicts of interest, including being members of various working groups, advisory boards, committees, task forces, and panels.
SOURCE: Kerlikowske K et al. JAMA Intern Med. 2019 Jul 1. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.1758 .
Identifying women at risk of breast cancer is key, but physicians and policymakers should pause and reassess how exactly to go about it, according to Ilana B. Richman, MD, and Susan H. Busch, PhD of the Yale School of Medicine.
The latest proposal from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration focuses on recommending additional screening for women with dense breasts, but that can be too broad of a stroke. “Breast density is only one aspect of breast cancer risk,” the coauthors noted, and limiting supplemental screening recommendations to women with dense breasts may leave out many others at legitimate risk.
So how should supplemental screening be handled moving forward? In their accompanying study, Kerlikowske et al. rejected 2 strategies while embracing elements of 3 others, but none of them were recognized as the proper path to take.
At the same time, the coauthors asked, “Why legislate this particular area of medicine?” And what is the exact opportunity cost of supplemental screening? There is no simple answer, which highlights “both the overall inefficiency of supplemental screening and the insensitivity of a targeted approach.” In short, more work is needed.
These comments are adapted from an accompanying editorial (JAMA Intern Med. 2019 Jul 1. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.1737 ). Dr. Richman reported receiving funding from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to develop quality measures, along with funding from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences.
Identifying women at risk of breast cancer is key, but physicians and policymakers should pause and reassess how exactly to go about it, according to Ilana B. Richman, MD, and Susan H. Busch, PhD of the Yale School of Medicine.
The latest proposal from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration focuses on recommending additional screening for women with dense breasts, but that can be too broad of a stroke. “Breast density is only one aspect of breast cancer risk,” the coauthors noted, and limiting supplemental screening recommendations to women with dense breasts may leave out many others at legitimate risk.
So how should supplemental screening be handled moving forward? In their accompanying study, Kerlikowske et al. rejected 2 strategies while embracing elements of 3 others, but none of them were recognized as the proper path to take.
At the same time, the coauthors asked, “Why legislate this particular area of medicine?” And what is the exact opportunity cost of supplemental screening? There is no simple answer, which highlights “both the overall inefficiency of supplemental screening and the insensitivity of a targeted approach.” In short, more work is needed.
These comments are adapted from an accompanying editorial (JAMA Intern Med. 2019 Jul 1. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.1737 ). Dr. Richman reported receiving funding from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to develop quality measures, along with funding from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences.
Identifying women at risk of breast cancer is key, but physicians and policymakers should pause and reassess how exactly to go about it, according to Ilana B. Richman, MD, and Susan H. Busch, PhD of the Yale School of Medicine.
The latest proposal from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration focuses on recommending additional screening for women with dense breasts, but that can be too broad of a stroke. “Breast density is only one aspect of breast cancer risk,” the coauthors noted, and limiting supplemental screening recommendations to women with dense breasts may leave out many others at legitimate risk.
So how should supplemental screening be handled moving forward? In their accompanying study, Kerlikowske et al. rejected 2 strategies while embracing elements of 3 others, but none of them were recognized as the proper path to take.
At the same time, the coauthors asked, “Why legislate this particular area of medicine?” And what is the exact opportunity cost of supplemental screening? There is no simple answer, which highlights “both the overall inefficiency of supplemental screening and the insensitivity of a targeted approach.” In short, more work is needed.
These comments are adapted from an accompanying editorial (JAMA Intern Med. 2019 Jul 1. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.1737 ). Dr. Richman reported receiving funding from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to develop quality measures, along with funding from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences.
Breast density should be a factor in assessing breast cancer risk and recommending supplemental imaging, but not the primary factor, according to a study of women who were screened for the disease.
“Counseling strategies that identified women for supplemental imaging based on breast density and BCSC 5-year risk were more efficient compared with strategies based on age and density or density alone,” wrote Karla Kerlikowske, MD, of the Department of Veterans Affairs, and her coauthors. The study was published in JAMA Internal Medicine.
To assess breast cancer risk and strategies for recommending supplemental screening, the researchers assembled a cohort of 638,856 women aged 40 to 74 years who received mammograms at Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) facilities from Jan. 3, 2005, to Dec. 31, 2014. Participants were identified as high risk via combinations of Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) breast density, BCSC 5-year breast cancer risk, and age.
Women with dense breasts made up 47% of those screened, and 60% of those with advanced cancers. Low advanced cancer rates (less than .61 per 1,000 mammograms) occurred in 34.5% of women with dense breasts, while high advanced cancer rates (greater than or equal to .61 cases per 1,000 mammograms) occurred in women with heterogeneously dense breasts and a 5-year risk of 2.5% or higher (6.0% of screened women) and those with extremely dense breasts and a 5-year risk of 1.0% or higher (6.5% of screened women).
In a hypothetical cohort of 100,000 women, supplemental imaging for all 47,012 women with dense breasts would mean a ratio of 1,866 supplemental imaging discussions per potential advanced breast cancer prevented. If imaging was considered based on a combination of density plus BCSC 5-year risk, the number of women screened would be reduced to 12,506 and the ratio would become 1,097 supplemental imaging discussions per potential advanced cancer prevented.
The coauthors acknowledged their study’s limitations, including their lack of ability to determine if women at high risk of advanced cancer would benefit from supplemental screening. In addition, they were unable to evaluate digital breast tomosynthesis outcomes, though they noted that, to their knowledge, “no published evidence indicates that advanced cancer rates differ for digital mammography vs. tomosynthesis according to breast density.”
The study was funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium, the National Cancer Institute, the Agency for Health Research and Quality, and the Lake Champlain Cancer Research Organization. The authors reported several potential conflicts of interest, including being members of various working groups, advisory boards, committees, task forces, and panels.
SOURCE: Kerlikowske K et al. JAMA Intern Med. 2019 Jul 1. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.1758 .
Breast density should be a factor in assessing breast cancer risk and recommending supplemental imaging, but not the primary factor, according to a study of women who were screened for the disease.
“Counseling strategies that identified women for supplemental imaging based on breast density and BCSC 5-year risk were more efficient compared with strategies based on age and density or density alone,” wrote Karla Kerlikowske, MD, of the Department of Veterans Affairs, and her coauthors. The study was published in JAMA Internal Medicine.
To assess breast cancer risk and strategies for recommending supplemental screening, the researchers assembled a cohort of 638,856 women aged 40 to 74 years who received mammograms at Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) facilities from Jan. 3, 2005, to Dec. 31, 2014. Participants were identified as high risk via combinations of Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) breast density, BCSC 5-year breast cancer risk, and age.
Women with dense breasts made up 47% of those screened, and 60% of those with advanced cancers. Low advanced cancer rates (less than .61 per 1,000 mammograms) occurred in 34.5% of women with dense breasts, while high advanced cancer rates (greater than or equal to .61 cases per 1,000 mammograms) occurred in women with heterogeneously dense breasts and a 5-year risk of 2.5% or higher (6.0% of screened women) and those with extremely dense breasts and a 5-year risk of 1.0% or higher (6.5% of screened women).
In a hypothetical cohort of 100,000 women, supplemental imaging for all 47,012 women with dense breasts would mean a ratio of 1,866 supplemental imaging discussions per potential advanced breast cancer prevented. If imaging was considered based on a combination of density plus BCSC 5-year risk, the number of women screened would be reduced to 12,506 and the ratio would become 1,097 supplemental imaging discussions per potential advanced cancer prevented.
The coauthors acknowledged their study’s limitations, including their lack of ability to determine if women at high risk of advanced cancer would benefit from supplemental screening. In addition, they were unable to evaluate digital breast tomosynthesis outcomes, though they noted that, to their knowledge, “no published evidence indicates that advanced cancer rates differ for digital mammography vs. tomosynthesis according to breast density.”
The study was funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium, the National Cancer Institute, the Agency for Health Research and Quality, and the Lake Champlain Cancer Research Organization. The authors reported several potential conflicts of interest, including being members of various working groups, advisory boards, committees, task forces, and panels.
SOURCE: Kerlikowske K et al. JAMA Intern Med. 2019 Jul 1. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.1758 .
FROM JAMA INTERNAL MEDICINE
Infertility: A practical framework
For millions of couples, a primary care physician may be the first point of contact for fertility concerns. Statistics from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention indicate that 12% of women ages 15 to 44 received fertility services from 2006 to 2010.1 Despite seeking services, most couples requested only advice or testing rather than treatments such as ovulation-inducing medications, surgery, or, rarely, assisted reproductive technologies including in vitro fertilization. Based on these data, primary care physicians are in a unique position to offer guidance and provide fertility services in most circumstances without the need for referral.
This article reviews the answers to questions patients frequently ask, and outlines a practical framework for the evaluation and management of the infertile couple.
MANY PATIENTS SEEK INFORMATION
At least 1 million medical visits per year are for women seeking help in becoming pregnant, with the number increasing over the last several decades.1 Reasons for the increase include delayed childbearing and the effects of aging on the female reproductive system (“female reproductive aging”), as well as the availability of increasingly effective treatments for infertility.
While the prevalence of infertility in US couples is widely quoted as 10% to 15%,2 there is no estimate for the number of fertility-related questions patients routinely pose to care providers. These questions often relate to coital timing, use of lubricants, positioning, and the use of fertility trackers and ovulation predictors.
A 2017 study of women with 12 months of infertility found that only 8% sought subspecialist care vs care from a general physician or provider, indicating that generalists are most often the first point of contact.3 The majority (92%) of women responding to a survey regarding fertility-awareness education indicated a preference for immediate counseling from their general practitioner.4
Although some healthcare providers may consider infertility simply a quality-of-life issue, the World Health Organization classifies it as a disease, and as such it warrants identification, assessment, and intervention.5 Further, patients with infertility are known to experience considerable psychological distress related to their condition. In a comparison study, women with infertility experienced levels of psychological distress similar to the level in patients with cancer and patients with chronic medical illness.6
In the current era, general practitioners and women’s health specialists may also now address patients’ questions about reproductive aging and egg-freezing, which is now an established technology.7
FAILURE TO CONCEIVE AFTER 1 YEAR
As women approach age 40, the potential for fertility decreases rapidly and significantly. Women in their later 30s have only half the fertility of women in their early 20s.10 Misperceptions of aging and female fertility have been fueled by widely publicized celebrity births from women in their 40s and even 50s, without disclosing the use of frozen or donor eggs. This unfortunate fact affects women actively trying to conceive as well as women who wish to delay childbearing due to lack of a partner or for personal or professional reasons. Primary care physicians should be able to provide counseling relevant to female reproductive aging and make suitable and timely referrals for fertility preservation if indicated.
AN EMOTIONAL ISSUE
In approaching the couple with infertility, it is important to proceed with great sensitivity for the socioemotional context of this diagnosis. For both the male and female partner, infertility can be highly stigmatizing, and can be viewed as a personal or relationship failure.
Couples should be encouraged to ask embarrassing or uncomfortable questions. Although this may not be feasible in many circumstances, interviews should ideally be conducted with both partners individually as well as together, to allow sensitive issues to be shared. In some cases, a partner may be unaware of a history of a sexually transmitted infection, a prior abortion, the use of testosterone supplements or medications to enhance male sexual performance, or a vasectomy or tubal ligation during a previous relationship.
It is not unusual that the anxiety of infertility can cause decreased libido and sexual and erectile dysfunction. These issues can further complicate the problem of conceiving, and couples counseling is not uncommonly required.11 Patients are often reassured to know that they are not alone in their diagnosis.
LOOK FOR CLUES
Before embarking on a series of tests, the primary care physician can carefully evaluate for clues that may guide the diagnostic evaluation. The approach can be individualized based on the patient’s age, duration of subfertility (ie, how long they have been trying to become pregnant), and risk factors. But as a general rule, regardless of age, couples who have been trying to conceive for more than 1 year should be encouraged to pursue additional testing.
Because each month presents a new cycle of hope (often followed by intense disappointment), the prevailing sentiment to “just give it a little more time” must be countered by education and counseling. The primary care physician must increase awareness that lack of pregnancy in the stated time periods is a compelling reason for evaluation.
History-taking in the infertile couple should include a complete gynecologic and menstrual history. A history of sexually transmitted diseases that can cause tubal disease, such as gonorrhea and Chlamydia, is significant. Both partners should be assessed for a history of prior conceptions, past medical or surgical problems, medications, and exposures to environmental toxins including alcohol, tobacco, and drugs.
A detailed physical examination can provide clues to the cause of subfertility, especially if signs of obesity, androgen excess, or insulin resistance are present.
QUESTIONS OFTEN ASKED BY COUPLES TRYING TO CONCEIVE
Clinicians are frequently asked questions related to sexual practices and lifestyle in relation to fertility and should be comfortable responding to questions in these areas.
Does frequent ejaculation ‘use up’ my sperm?
Men should be reassured that frequent ejaculations do not decrease sperm counts; even daily ejaculation does not deplete the concentration of sperm. Male partners can be reassured that “saving up” is not an effective strategy; in fact, abstinence periods of greater than 5 days can adversely affect semen parameters.12
How often should we have sex?
Infrequent intercourse (< 1 time per week) reduces the monthly chance of conceiving.13 There does not seem to be a significant improvement in fecundity with daily intercourse vs intercourse on alternate days. Strict schedules surrounding intercourse may increase stress, and reassurance should be offered that intercourse need not be regimented. Every 1 to 2 days should suffice.
Are any sexual positions better for conception?
There is no evidence that particular coital positioning or remaining supine after intercourse improves fertility. Sperm can be found within the endocervix within seconds of ejaculation, irrespective of sexual position.
What is the window of fertility?
There is good evidence that the fertile window lasts approximately 6 days and closes after ovulation.13,14 Women with regular cycles can determine their typical day of ovulation based on menstrual tracking. Intercourse should begin about 6 days before ovulation and should continue every 1 to 2 days for 1 week to fully capture this window.
Should we change our lifestyle?
Couples seeking pregnancy should be advised to limit alcohol and caffeine use, completely abstain from cigarette smoking or illicit drug use, and maintain a healthy body mass index.
Very few data exist to support particular diets or supplements to promote fertility, including antioxidants and herbal remedies. Folic acid supplementation is recommended in all women attempting to conceive to reduce the incidence of birth defects.
Do lubricants reduce fertility?
Although there seem to be no differences in fecundity rates in couples using commercial lubricants, most water-based lubricants are best avoided in couples with infertility, as adverse effects on sperm have been demonstrated in vitro.15 If lubrication is needed, couples may try mineral oil, canola oil, or hydroxyetylcellulose-based lubricants (eg, Pre-seed).
Do fertility trackers work?
Many couples with primary infertility perceive that coital timing is critical and worry that their infertility is due to poorly timed intercourse; in fact, this is seldom the case.
Despite widespread marketing of urinary luteinizing hormone (LH) detection kits and electronic trackers and monitors, there is no clear evidence that these methods improve monthly rates of conception.
Women with a regular menstrual cycle should be encouraged to take notice when their cervical mucus appears clear and slippery (a sign of ovulation). Not all women are able to detect these fluctuations; however, for those who can, observing cervical mucus changes appears to be equivalent or superior to predictor kits in predicting conception.16
A PRACTICAL FRAMEWORK FOR EVALUATING THE INFERTILE COUPLE
To assess for the common factors identified in Table 1, the essential investigation of the infertile couple includes:
- Semen analysis
- Confirmation of ovulation
- Hysterosalpingography.
Consideration can also be given to ovarian reserve testing in women at risk of diminished ovarian reserve. The above investigation can be performed simultaneously to allow for prompt identification of any issues. Further, infertility is often a combination of problems (eg, anovulation in the woman together with a problem in the man), so an incomplete evaluation may overlook a coexisting diagnosis and lead to delays in treatment and pregnancy.
Tests that are no longer typically used in clinical practice are outlined in Table 2.
OVARIAN RESERVE TESTING AND FEMALE REPRODUCTIVE AGING
Ovarian reserve refers to the number of fertilizable oocytes that remain in the ovary. This reserve changes over time, and changes occur rapidly as women approach and enter their 30s. Though not the case in men, the age of the female partner is an independent risk factor for infertility. This discrepancy is due to loss of ovarian reserve, chromosome abnormalities in embryos, and the development of medical conditions with age that affect fertility.
Testing for ovarian reserve does not necessarily predict an overall inability to achieve a live birth,17 but it can predict response to exogenous gonadotropins and, to some degree, the chance for successful pregnancy with assisted reproductive technology.18
The ASRM states that testing for diminished ovarian reserve may provide useful information in women who have had a previous poor response to gonadotropins and in women planning assisted reproductive technology.19 The ASRM also indicates that the following are risk factors for diminished ovarian reserve, and clinicians may target the assessment accordingly19:
- Age 35 or older
- History of exposure to chemotherapy or pelvic radiation
- Family history of early menopause (age < 40)
- History of ovarian surgery
- Unexplained or idiopathic fertility.
Although several tests of ovarian reserve exist, either an antimullerian hormone (AMH) test or a combined cycle day-3 follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) and estradiol level are the 2 tests commonly used in clinical practice. Antral follicle counts are an ultrasonographic measure used by infertility specialists but rarely by primary care physicians. Assays such as inhibin are rarely ordered and have limited clinical utility.
The AMH test
Many reproductive endocrinologists rely on the AMH level as a single test of ovarian reserve as it is easy to obtain, has a relatively low cost, and offers stable results. AMH is produced by the granulosa cells of the ovarian antral follicles and is readily detected in serum samples.
Conveniently for the clinician, levels of this hormone remain stable throughout the menstrual cycle and therefore can be tested on any day and at any time of day. Lower serum AMH levels (< 1 ng/mL) have been shown to correspond to diminished ovarian stimulation with gonadotropins as well as decreased embryo quality and poor pregnancy outcomes with assisted reproductive technology.19
Nevertheless, despite overall stability, AMH levels can be falsely lowered in women using exogenous hormones or with a diagnosis of hypogonadotropic hypogonadism. Levels may be higher than expected in women with polycystic ovary syndrome due to higher numbers of antral and preantral follicles in the polycystic ovary.
The day-3 follicle-stimulating hormone test
FSH and 17-beta estradiol testing can be ordered in combination to assess function of the hypothalamic-pituitary-ovarian axis on day 3 of the menstrual cycle. There is some flexibility, however, and testing obtained on cycle day 2, 3, or 4 yields equivalent results.
Although there are no strict cutoffs, FSH levels that appear elevated (> 10–20 IU/L) are associated with lower chances of conceiving with in vitro fertilization in multiple studies.20
The test is limited by levels that may fluctuate cycle to cycle, and reassuring test results do not necessarily indicate that a woman will achieve a pregnancy. Although a serum estradiol value alone is not a useful test, it can be used in combination with day-3 FSH to screen for diminished ovarian reserve.
As premature recruitment of a follicle can cause an early follicular rise in estradiol, FSH may be falsely suppressed on day 3. For example, a “normal” day-3 FSH combined with an elevated day-3 17-beta estradiol level of 60 to 80 pg/mL is associated with a poor response to medical treatments for infertility.
Female reproductive aging
Aging of the female reproductive system is a central threat to fertility, and prompt assessment and referral are warranted for women age 35 or older who have been trying to conceive for more than 6 months. The ASRM recommends that women over age 40 be evaluated immediately.21
A prevailing misconception is that regular menstrual cycles correspond with normal fertility. In reality, women lose their ability to achieve a healthy live birth in the 5 to 10 years preceding menopause. Although all women who do not desire pregnancy should still use appropriate contraception to avoid unintended pregnancy, women who do desire pregnancy should be aware of these physiologic changes.
Classic age-related changes in ovarian reserve are accompanied by a steep rise in aneuploidy and miscarriage risk.22 This is particularly relevant as women increasingly delay childbearing in modern society. Loss of fertility begins at 32 and abruptly accelerates at age 3721; this fact is poorly communicated to and understood by patients. In a 2018 study of highly educated women, most respondents failed to identify that 45-year-old women can only rarely achieve a successful pregnancy.23
In recent decades, the percentage of women who delay childbearing until after age 35 has steadily increased. There is a widespread misconception that fertility treatments and assisted reproductive technology can compensate for female reproductive aging. Primary care physicians can play a central role in reminding couples that age remains the single greatest predictor of natural fertility and the chance of success with assisted reproduction.
Further, for women who desire future fertility and are without a partner, primary care physicians can counsel them regarding the availability of donor insemination or egg freezing. Studies confirm that women want clinicians to initiate information on reproductive health, and 80% of women undergoing elective egg-freezing for fertility preservation wished that they had done so at an earlier age.24,25
FEMALE PERITONEAL AND STRUCTURAL CAUSES
Women with endometriosis, fibroids, or a history of tubal disease have impaired fecundity. Pelvic imaging is an essential component of their evaluation. Although hysterosalpingography is the mainstay of tubal assessment, in select cases ultrasonography or hysteroscopy may be indicated.
Tubal disease and hysterosalpingography
Tubal disease remains one of the most common causes of infertility in the US females. In most cases, tubal damage is secondary to pelvic inflammatory disease from infection with gonorrhea or Chlamydia, or both.
Rates of confirmed tubal-factor infertility have been shown to increase with both the severity of the infection and the number of past infections.26 In a landmark study, 1 episode of pelvic inflammatory disease was associated with a 12% risk of tubal-factor infertility, whereas 3 infections carried a risk as high as 54%. Pelvic inflammatory disease is also known to increase the risk of ectopic pregnancy.
To assess tubal patency, hysterosalpingography, a radiographic procedure, is typically performed using fluoroscopy and injected contrast material. Some centers may offer sonohysterography as a radiation-free alternative, depending on sonographic skill and experience. Both tests are best scheduled in the window between the end of menstrual bleeding and ovulation. In practice, patients with regular cycles can typically schedule hysterosalpingography between cycle days 5 and 12.
In patients with known hydrosalpinx (a distended fallopian tube due to blockage) or a history of pelvic infection, doxycycline should be given before the procedure.27 Patients with demonstrated hydrosalpinx on hysterosalpingography should receive doxycycline 100 mg twice daily for 5 days to prevent posthysterosalpingography pelvic inflammatory disease.27 Patients with active pelvic or cervical infection should not undergo hysterosalpingography .
Women with confirmed hydrosalpinx or tubal obstruction can be referred for laparoscopy. Gynecologic surgeons will plan their approach based on whether the obstruction is proximal (near the uterus) or distal (near the ovary) as well as whether hydrosalpinx, abnormal tubal architecture, salpingitis isthmica nodosa, or peritubal adhesions are noted. Tubal surgery can be effective in mild cases of tubal disease; however, as in vitro fertilization is becoming more effective, patients with moderate or severe tubal disease are increasingly being referred directly for assisted reproductive technology. Before undergoing assisted reproductive technology, hydrosalpinx will need to be addressed, as it can decrease clinical pregnancy rates with in vitro fertilization.
Endometriosis
Endometriosis is found in 21% to 47% of women with subfertility28 and commonly causes pain, ovarian cysts, and tubal disease. There is often a delay of 7 to 8 years for diagnosis due to the misapprehension that severe dysmenorrhea is normal. Women with an affected first-degree family member are at substantially increased risk.
Although endometriosis is commonly thought to result from reflux of endometrial tissue into the peritoneal cavity with menses, there are multiple proposed mechanisms for the disease.29 The pathogenesis of endometriosis is enigmatic, and there are likely as yet undetermined immunologic and genetic predispositions that confer increased risk.
Common symptoms of endometriosis are dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, and pelvic pain, and these are sometimes accompanied by bowel and bladder symptoms. Pelvic examination classically demonstrates an immobile uterus and uterosacral nodularity; palpation of these nodules can elicit pain. On laparoscopy, endometriosis can range from minimal to severe; however, stage of endometriosis correlates poorly with reported symptoms.30
Consideration of surgery is based on clinical history, results of the pelvic examination, and possible findings on ultrasonography or hysterosalpingography. Although positive findings on imaging can support a plan for intervention, endometriosis is largely a peritoneal disease, and evidence of tubal damage or ovarian cysts is rarely evident on ultrasonography. In women with menstrual complaints (eg, dysmenorrhea, heavy menstrual bleeding, abnormal uterine bleeding) and a history of infertility, ultrasonography may be useful in determining the presence of uterine pathology such as ovarian cyst or endometrioma, large hydrosalpinx, polyp, or substantial fibroid burden—any of which may have a significant impact on female fertility.
In the absence of a reliable blood test or imaging study, the gold standard for the diagnosis of endometriosis continues to be laparoscopic surgery. Hormonal treatments for endometriosis symptoms are not effective in improving infertility and will preclude pregnancy. Laparoscopic surgery is more successful in improving pregnancy rates in women with advanced disease: pregnancy rates after surgery can be as high as 60% in women with ovarian endometriomas but are significantly lower in women with removal of minimal to mild disease.30,31 Women over age 35 or who present with low ovarian reserve and whose male partner has semen abnormalities should consider moving directly to assisted reproductive technology rather than pursuing endometriosis surgery.
MALE FACTOR INFERTILITY
Although male partners are often highly engaged in and supportive of the fertility evaluation, some are reluctant to undergo testing, and some wish to undergo semen analysis only after female factors have been ruled out. Our practice is to evaluate male factors immediately, due to the high contribution of male factors (up to 40% of cases) either alone or in combination with female factors.32
Men at particularly increased risk of semen abnormalities include those with a history of chemotherapy or radiation or exposure to toxins (eg, environmental exposures, alcohol, tobacco, illicit substances) and prescribed medications.
At a minimum, for the male partner, a reproductive history should be taken and a semen analysis ordered. Men should be directly queried about testosterone use, as this often-used anabolic steroid hormone can severely impair sperm production.
Men who have low sperm counts, motility, or morphology scores based on World Health Organization criteria should not be deemed “infertile,” as there is significant variation from one analysis to the next, and normal fertility has been reported in men with notably low sperm counts. Particular caution should be exercised in interpreting low morphology scores in men with normal counts and motility, as this parameter appears to have the least prognostic value in this context. Men with abnormal semen analyses should be referred to a specialist for further urologic evaluation and treatment.
Treatments for male factor infertility include surgery, steroid hormones, and possibly intrauterine insemination or assisted reproductive technology. In even the most challenging cases, male infertility is now largely treatable with intracytoplasmic sperm injection with assisted reproductive technology. While most advances in in vitro fertilization have been evolutionary, intracytoplasmic sperm injection was revolutionary. This breakthrough technology allows a single sperm to be injected directly into the oocyte. Sperm for this procedure can be obtained either from the ejaculate or from microsurgical testicular sperm extraction.
ANOVULATION
A thorough menstrual history can be informative, as most females of reproductive age have a fairly predictable 25-to-35-day monthly menstrual cycle. Women presenting with menstrual charting with this pattern do not require laboratory confirmation of ovulation. Basal body temperatures are rarely used currently, as they are time-consuming, can induce stress, and are confirmatory rather than predictive of ovulation. Endometrial biopsy for endometrial “dating” is no longer performed in infertile women.
If laboratory confirmation is desired, LH kit testing with a commercially available test or a luteal phase serum progesterone obtained 7 days after suspected ovulation can be obtained. A serum progesterone level higher than 3 ng/mL is indicative of ovulation.19 Due to the notable fluctuations in ovulatory-appearing progesterone levels over several hours, caution must be taken in interpreting a lower-normal level as indicative of a luteal phase insufficiency.
Polycystic ovary syndrome
Polycystic ovary syndrome is important to understand because it is a metabolic condition that predisposes patients to a variety of health risks. Along with gynecologic consequences such as infertility, abnormal uterine bleeding, and endometrial pathology, it is often accompanied by alterations in glucose and lipid metabolism, obesity, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease.35
Despite its name, the syndrome does not involve the presence of classic ovarian cysts. In fact, the cysts associated with polycystic ovary syndrome are dense accumulations of antral follicles arranged peripherally in the ovarian cortex; they should not be removed surgically as they represent the ovarian reserve.
Although ovaries that appear polycystic on transvaginal ultrasonography are often associated with the syndrome, they are not invariably present and are not absolutely required for the diagnosis of polycystic ovary syndrome based on the most commonly used criteria.35 Several diagnostic criteria have been proposed for polycystic ovary syndrome and its phenotypes. The 2003 revised Rotterdam criteria require 2 out of the following 3 features:
- Oligo-ovulation or anovulation
- Evidence of hyperandrogenism, whether clinical (eg, acne or hirsutism) or based on laboratory testing
- Polycystic-appearing ovaries on ultrasonography.
There is no single test that can diagnose the disease. Although polycystic ovary syndrome is often characterized by elevated LH levels, LH–FSH ratios, and fasting insulin levels, these are not diagnostic criteria. The diagnosis hinges on excluding other causes of anovulation such as thyroid disease, hyperprolactinemia, 21-hydroxylase deficiency, androgen-producing neoplasms, and Cushing syndrome. In addition to checking serum testosterone levels, irregular menstrual cycles and infertility should be assessed at minimum with measurement of TSH, prolactin, and day-3 FSH. Obese women should be screened for metabolic syndrome, which should include an assessment of impaired glucose tolerance with a 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test.36
Women with polycystic ovary syndrome are known to have insulin resistance, which is difficult to assess and is independent of their body mass index.37 They often report a family history of diabetes or a personal history of gestational diabetes or giving birth to infants who are large for gestational age. Although most women diagnosed with insulin resistance and anovulatory infertility will not yet have a diagnosis of diabetes, women with polycystic ovary syndrome are 3 to 7 times more likely to develop type 2 diabetes later in life37 and are at increased risk of lipid abnormalities, cardiovascular disease, and stroke. Therefore, interventions to address the compounding influences of polycystic ovary syndrome and obesity can improve fertility outcomes and help prevent long-term sequelae that accompany the syndrome.
Treatment for women with polycystic ovary syndrome attempting conception includes lifestyle modifications, medications for ovulation induction, and possible use of insulin sensitizers. Metformin alone is not effective as a single agent for achieving pregnancy.38 Diet, weight loss, and exercise can have dramatic effects on ovulation and pregnancy and should be highly encouraged.
Ovulation induction is often required in anovulatory women, either in combination with lifestyle modifications or used subsequently if modifications are not successful. Letrozole is advised as the initial agent in women with obesity and anovulatory infertility rather than clomiphene citrate; a side-by-side comparison demonstrated increased rates of ovulation and live birth with letrozole.39
Once-daily letrozole 2.5 mg or clomiphene 50 mg can be prescribed for 5 days, from cycle days 3 through 7 to cycle days 5 through 9. If this initial dosing fails to result in ovulation, the dose can be increased. Known adverse effects are hot flashes, headaches, ovarian cysts, and increased risk of multiple gestation.
Metformin should be considered as an adjunct to fertility treatments in women with polycystic ovary syndrome, especially those with obesity or impaired glucose tolerance, or if there is no response to standard ovulation induction.
Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (cystic enlargement of the ovaries with potentially dangerous fluid and electrolyte imbalances) can occur in women with polycystic ovary syndrome; however, it rarely occurs with oral medications.
- Chandra A, Copen CE, Stephen EH. Infertility service use in the United States: data from the National Survey of Family Growth, 1982–2010. Natl Health Stat Report 2014; (73):1–21. pmid:24467919
- Mosher WD, Pratt WF. Fecundity and infertility in the United States: incidence and trends. Fertil Steril 1991; 56(2):192–193. pmid:2070846
- Boltz MW, Sanders JN, Simonsen SE, Stanford JB. Fertility treatment, use of in vitro fertilization, and time to live birth based on initial provider type. J Am Board Fam Med 2017; 30(2):230–238. doi:10.3122/jabfm.2017.02.160184
- Hampton K, Mazza D. Fertility-awareness knowledge, attitudes and practices of women attending general practice. Aust Fam Physician 2015; 44(11):840–845. pmid:26590626
- Zegers-Hochschild F, Adamson GD, de Mouzon J, et al; International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology; World Health Organization. International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology (ICMART) and the World Health Organization (WHO) revised glossary of ART terminology, 2009. Fertil Steril 2009; 92(5):1520–1524. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.09.009
- Domar AD, Zuttermeister PC, Friedman R. The psychological impact of infertility: a comparison with patients with other medical conditions. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol 1993; 14(suppl):45–52. pmid:8142988
- Argyle CE, Harper JC, Davies MC. Oocyte cryopreservation: where are we now? Hum Reprod Update 2016; 22(4):440–449. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmw007
- Practice Committee of American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Definitions of infertility and recurrent pregnancy loss: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril 2013; 99(1):63. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.09.023
- Guttmacher AF. Factors affecting normal expectancy of conception. J Am Med Assoc 1956; 161(9):855–860. pmid:13319020
- Dunson DB, Baird DD, Colombo B. Increased infertility with age in men and women. Obstet Gynecol 2004; 103(1):51–56. doi:10.1097/01.AOG.0000100153.24061.45
- National Collaborating Centre for Women’s and Children’s Health (UK). Fertility: assessment and treatment for people with fertility problems. London: Royal College of Obstetricians & Gynaecologists; 2013. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK247932. Accessed May 6, 2019.
- Elzanaty S, Malm J, Giwercman A. Duration of sexual abstinence: epididymal and accessory sex gland secretions and their relationship to sperm motility. Hum Reprod 2005; 20(1):221–225. doi:10.1093/humrep/deh586
- Wilcox AJ, Weinberg CR, Baird DD. Timing of sexual intercourse in relation to ovulation. Effects on the probability of conception, survival of the pregnancy, and sex of the baby. N Engl J Med 1995; 333(23):1517–1521. doi:10.1056/NEJM199512073332301
- Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine in collaboration with the Society for Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility. Optimizing natural fertility: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril 2017; 107(1):52–58. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.09.029
- Kutteh WH, Chao CH, Ritter JO, Byrd W. Vaginal lubricants for the infertile couple: effect on sperm activity. Int J Fertil Menopausal Stud 1996; 41(4):400–404. pmid:8894797
- Bigelow JL, Dunson DB, Stanford JB, Ecochard R, Gnoth C, Colombo B. Mucus observations in the fertile window: a better predictor of conception than timing of intercourse. Hum Reprod 2004; 19(4):889–892. doi:10.1093/humrep/deh173
- Steiner AZ, Pritchard D, Stanczyk FZ, et al. Association between biomarkers of ovarian reserve and infertility among older women of reproductive age. JAMA 2017; 318(14):1367–1376. doi:10.1001/jama.2017.14588
- Broekmans FJ, Kwee J, Hendriks DJ, Mol BW, Lambalk CB. A systematic review of tests predicting ovarian reserve and IVF outcome. Hum Reprod Update 2006; 12(6):685–718. doi:10.1093/humupd/dml034
- Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Diagnostic evaluation of the infertile female: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril 2015; 103(6):e44–e50. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.03.019
- Sharara FI, Scott RT Jr, Seifer DB. The detection of diminished ovarian reserve in infertile women. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998; 179(3 Pt 1):804–812. pmid:9757994
- American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee on Gynecologic Practice and Practice Committee. Female age-related fertility decline. Committee Opinion No. 589. Fertil Steril 2014; 101(3):633–634. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.12.032
- Balasch J, Gratacós E. Delayed childbearing: effects on fertility and the outcome of pregnancy. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2012; 24(3):187–193. doi:10.1097/GCO.0b013e3283517908
- Hickman LC, Fortin C, Goodman L, Liu X, Flyckt R. Fertility and fertility preservation: knowledge, awareness and attitudes of female graduate students. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2018; 23(2):130–138. doi:10.1080/13625187.2018.1455085
- Lundsberg LS, Pal L, Gariepy AM, Xu X, Chu MC, Illuzzi JL. Knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding conception and fertility: a population-based survey among reproductive-age United States women. Fertil Steril 2014; 101(3):767–774. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.12.006
- Hodes-Wertz B, Druckenmiller S, Smith M, Noyes N. What do reproductive-age women who undergo oocyte cryopreservation think about the process as a means to preserve fertility? Fertil Steril 2013; 100(5):1343–1349. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.07.201
- Weström L, Joesoef R, Reynolds G, Hagdu A, Thompson SE. Pelvic inflammatory disease and fertility. A cohort study of 1,844 women with laparoscopically verified disease and 657 control women with normal laparoscopic results. Sex Transm Dis 1992; 19(4):185–192. pmid:1411832
- ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 195: prevention of infection after gynecologic procedures. Obstet Gynecol 2018; 131(6):e172–e189. doi:10.1097/AOG.0000000000002670
- Balasch J, Creus M, Fábregues F, et al. Visible and non-visible endometriosis at laparoscopy in fertile and infertile women and in patients with chronic pelvic pain: a prospective study. Hum Reprod 1996; 11(2):387–391. pmid:8671229
- Falcone T, Flyckt R. Clinical management of endometriosis. Obstet Gynecol 2018; 131(3):557–571. doi:10.1097/AOG.0000000000002469
- Flyckt R, Kim S, Falcone T. Surgical management of endometriosis in patients with chronic pelvic pain. Semin Reprod Med 2017; 35(1):54–64. doi:10.1055/s-0036-1597306
- Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Endometriosis and infertility: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril 2012; 98(3):591–598. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.05.031
- Thonneau P, Marchand S, Tallec A, et al. Incidence and main causes of infertility in a resident population (1,850,000) of three French regions (1988–1989). Hum Reprod 1991; 6(6):811–816. pmid:1757519
- Cooper TG, Noonan E, von Eckardstein S, et al. World Health Organization reference values for human semen characteristics. Hum Reprod Update 2010; 16(3):231–245. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmp048
- Practice Committee of American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Diagnostic evaluation of the infertile male: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril 2012; 98(2):294–301. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.05.033
- Rotterdam ESHRE/ASRM-Sponsored PCOS consensus workshop group. Revised 2003 consensus on diagnostic criteria and long-term health risks related to polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). Hum Reprod 2004; 19(1):41–47. pmid:14688154
- Falcone T, Finegood DT, Fantus IG, Morris D. Androgen response to endogenous insulin secretion during the frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test in normal and hyperandrogenic women. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1990; 71(6):1653–1657. doi:10.1210/jcem-71-6-1653
- Daniilidis A, Dinas K. Long term health consequences of polycystic ovarian syndrome: a review analysis. Hippokratia 2009; 13(2):90–92. pmid:19561777
- Legro RS, Barnhart HX, Schlaff WD, et al; Cooperative Multicenter Reproductive Medicine Network. Clomiphene, metformin, or both for infertility in the polycystic ovary syndrome. N Engl J Med 2007; 356(6):551–566. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa063971
- Legro RS, Brzyski RG, Diamond MP, et al; NICHD Reproductive Medicine Network. Letrozole versus clomiphene for infertility in the polycystic ovary syndrome. N Engl J Med 2014; 371(2):119–129. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1313517
For millions of couples, a primary care physician may be the first point of contact for fertility concerns. Statistics from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention indicate that 12% of women ages 15 to 44 received fertility services from 2006 to 2010.1 Despite seeking services, most couples requested only advice or testing rather than treatments such as ovulation-inducing medications, surgery, or, rarely, assisted reproductive technologies including in vitro fertilization. Based on these data, primary care physicians are in a unique position to offer guidance and provide fertility services in most circumstances without the need for referral.
This article reviews the answers to questions patients frequently ask, and outlines a practical framework for the evaluation and management of the infertile couple.
MANY PATIENTS SEEK INFORMATION
At least 1 million medical visits per year are for women seeking help in becoming pregnant, with the number increasing over the last several decades.1 Reasons for the increase include delayed childbearing and the effects of aging on the female reproductive system (“female reproductive aging”), as well as the availability of increasingly effective treatments for infertility.
While the prevalence of infertility in US couples is widely quoted as 10% to 15%,2 there is no estimate for the number of fertility-related questions patients routinely pose to care providers. These questions often relate to coital timing, use of lubricants, positioning, and the use of fertility trackers and ovulation predictors.
A 2017 study of women with 12 months of infertility found that only 8% sought subspecialist care vs care from a general physician or provider, indicating that generalists are most often the first point of contact.3 The majority (92%) of women responding to a survey regarding fertility-awareness education indicated a preference for immediate counseling from their general practitioner.4
Although some healthcare providers may consider infertility simply a quality-of-life issue, the World Health Organization classifies it as a disease, and as such it warrants identification, assessment, and intervention.5 Further, patients with infertility are known to experience considerable psychological distress related to their condition. In a comparison study, women with infertility experienced levels of psychological distress similar to the level in patients with cancer and patients with chronic medical illness.6
In the current era, general practitioners and women’s health specialists may also now address patients’ questions about reproductive aging and egg-freezing, which is now an established technology.7
FAILURE TO CONCEIVE AFTER 1 YEAR
As women approach age 40, the potential for fertility decreases rapidly and significantly. Women in their later 30s have only half the fertility of women in their early 20s.10 Misperceptions of aging and female fertility have been fueled by widely publicized celebrity births from women in their 40s and even 50s, without disclosing the use of frozen or donor eggs. This unfortunate fact affects women actively trying to conceive as well as women who wish to delay childbearing due to lack of a partner or for personal or professional reasons. Primary care physicians should be able to provide counseling relevant to female reproductive aging and make suitable and timely referrals for fertility preservation if indicated.
AN EMOTIONAL ISSUE
In approaching the couple with infertility, it is important to proceed with great sensitivity for the socioemotional context of this diagnosis. For both the male and female partner, infertility can be highly stigmatizing, and can be viewed as a personal or relationship failure.
Couples should be encouraged to ask embarrassing or uncomfortable questions. Although this may not be feasible in many circumstances, interviews should ideally be conducted with both partners individually as well as together, to allow sensitive issues to be shared. In some cases, a partner may be unaware of a history of a sexually transmitted infection, a prior abortion, the use of testosterone supplements or medications to enhance male sexual performance, or a vasectomy or tubal ligation during a previous relationship.
It is not unusual that the anxiety of infertility can cause decreased libido and sexual and erectile dysfunction. These issues can further complicate the problem of conceiving, and couples counseling is not uncommonly required.11 Patients are often reassured to know that they are not alone in their diagnosis.
LOOK FOR CLUES
Before embarking on a series of tests, the primary care physician can carefully evaluate for clues that may guide the diagnostic evaluation. The approach can be individualized based on the patient’s age, duration of subfertility (ie, how long they have been trying to become pregnant), and risk factors. But as a general rule, regardless of age, couples who have been trying to conceive for more than 1 year should be encouraged to pursue additional testing.
Because each month presents a new cycle of hope (often followed by intense disappointment), the prevailing sentiment to “just give it a little more time” must be countered by education and counseling. The primary care physician must increase awareness that lack of pregnancy in the stated time periods is a compelling reason for evaluation.
History-taking in the infertile couple should include a complete gynecologic and menstrual history. A history of sexually transmitted diseases that can cause tubal disease, such as gonorrhea and Chlamydia, is significant. Both partners should be assessed for a history of prior conceptions, past medical or surgical problems, medications, and exposures to environmental toxins including alcohol, tobacco, and drugs.
A detailed physical examination can provide clues to the cause of subfertility, especially if signs of obesity, androgen excess, or insulin resistance are present.
QUESTIONS OFTEN ASKED BY COUPLES TRYING TO CONCEIVE
Clinicians are frequently asked questions related to sexual practices and lifestyle in relation to fertility and should be comfortable responding to questions in these areas.
Does frequent ejaculation ‘use up’ my sperm?
Men should be reassured that frequent ejaculations do not decrease sperm counts; even daily ejaculation does not deplete the concentration of sperm. Male partners can be reassured that “saving up” is not an effective strategy; in fact, abstinence periods of greater than 5 days can adversely affect semen parameters.12
How often should we have sex?
Infrequent intercourse (< 1 time per week) reduces the monthly chance of conceiving.13 There does not seem to be a significant improvement in fecundity with daily intercourse vs intercourse on alternate days. Strict schedules surrounding intercourse may increase stress, and reassurance should be offered that intercourse need not be regimented. Every 1 to 2 days should suffice.
Are any sexual positions better for conception?
There is no evidence that particular coital positioning or remaining supine after intercourse improves fertility. Sperm can be found within the endocervix within seconds of ejaculation, irrespective of sexual position.
What is the window of fertility?
There is good evidence that the fertile window lasts approximately 6 days and closes after ovulation.13,14 Women with regular cycles can determine their typical day of ovulation based on menstrual tracking. Intercourse should begin about 6 days before ovulation and should continue every 1 to 2 days for 1 week to fully capture this window.
Should we change our lifestyle?
Couples seeking pregnancy should be advised to limit alcohol and caffeine use, completely abstain from cigarette smoking or illicit drug use, and maintain a healthy body mass index.
Very few data exist to support particular diets or supplements to promote fertility, including antioxidants and herbal remedies. Folic acid supplementation is recommended in all women attempting to conceive to reduce the incidence of birth defects.
Do lubricants reduce fertility?
Although there seem to be no differences in fecundity rates in couples using commercial lubricants, most water-based lubricants are best avoided in couples with infertility, as adverse effects on sperm have been demonstrated in vitro.15 If lubrication is needed, couples may try mineral oil, canola oil, or hydroxyetylcellulose-based lubricants (eg, Pre-seed).
Do fertility trackers work?
Many couples with primary infertility perceive that coital timing is critical and worry that their infertility is due to poorly timed intercourse; in fact, this is seldom the case.
Despite widespread marketing of urinary luteinizing hormone (LH) detection kits and electronic trackers and monitors, there is no clear evidence that these methods improve monthly rates of conception.
Women with a regular menstrual cycle should be encouraged to take notice when their cervical mucus appears clear and slippery (a sign of ovulation). Not all women are able to detect these fluctuations; however, for those who can, observing cervical mucus changes appears to be equivalent or superior to predictor kits in predicting conception.16
A PRACTICAL FRAMEWORK FOR EVALUATING THE INFERTILE COUPLE
To assess for the common factors identified in Table 1, the essential investigation of the infertile couple includes:
- Semen analysis
- Confirmation of ovulation
- Hysterosalpingography.
Consideration can also be given to ovarian reserve testing in women at risk of diminished ovarian reserve. The above investigation can be performed simultaneously to allow for prompt identification of any issues. Further, infertility is often a combination of problems (eg, anovulation in the woman together with a problem in the man), so an incomplete evaluation may overlook a coexisting diagnosis and lead to delays in treatment and pregnancy.
Tests that are no longer typically used in clinical practice are outlined in Table 2.
OVARIAN RESERVE TESTING AND FEMALE REPRODUCTIVE AGING
Ovarian reserve refers to the number of fertilizable oocytes that remain in the ovary. This reserve changes over time, and changes occur rapidly as women approach and enter their 30s. Though not the case in men, the age of the female partner is an independent risk factor for infertility. This discrepancy is due to loss of ovarian reserve, chromosome abnormalities in embryos, and the development of medical conditions with age that affect fertility.
Testing for ovarian reserve does not necessarily predict an overall inability to achieve a live birth,17 but it can predict response to exogenous gonadotropins and, to some degree, the chance for successful pregnancy with assisted reproductive technology.18
The ASRM states that testing for diminished ovarian reserve may provide useful information in women who have had a previous poor response to gonadotropins and in women planning assisted reproductive technology.19 The ASRM also indicates that the following are risk factors for diminished ovarian reserve, and clinicians may target the assessment accordingly19:
- Age 35 or older
- History of exposure to chemotherapy or pelvic radiation
- Family history of early menopause (age < 40)
- History of ovarian surgery
- Unexplained or idiopathic fertility.
Although several tests of ovarian reserve exist, either an antimullerian hormone (AMH) test or a combined cycle day-3 follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) and estradiol level are the 2 tests commonly used in clinical practice. Antral follicle counts are an ultrasonographic measure used by infertility specialists but rarely by primary care physicians. Assays such as inhibin are rarely ordered and have limited clinical utility.
The AMH test
Many reproductive endocrinologists rely on the AMH level as a single test of ovarian reserve as it is easy to obtain, has a relatively low cost, and offers stable results. AMH is produced by the granulosa cells of the ovarian antral follicles and is readily detected in serum samples.
Conveniently for the clinician, levels of this hormone remain stable throughout the menstrual cycle and therefore can be tested on any day and at any time of day. Lower serum AMH levels (< 1 ng/mL) have been shown to correspond to diminished ovarian stimulation with gonadotropins as well as decreased embryo quality and poor pregnancy outcomes with assisted reproductive technology.19
Nevertheless, despite overall stability, AMH levels can be falsely lowered in women using exogenous hormones or with a diagnosis of hypogonadotropic hypogonadism. Levels may be higher than expected in women with polycystic ovary syndrome due to higher numbers of antral and preantral follicles in the polycystic ovary.
The day-3 follicle-stimulating hormone test
FSH and 17-beta estradiol testing can be ordered in combination to assess function of the hypothalamic-pituitary-ovarian axis on day 3 of the menstrual cycle. There is some flexibility, however, and testing obtained on cycle day 2, 3, or 4 yields equivalent results.
Although there are no strict cutoffs, FSH levels that appear elevated (> 10–20 IU/L) are associated with lower chances of conceiving with in vitro fertilization in multiple studies.20
The test is limited by levels that may fluctuate cycle to cycle, and reassuring test results do not necessarily indicate that a woman will achieve a pregnancy. Although a serum estradiol value alone is not a useful test, it can be used in combination with day-3 FSH to screen for diminished ovarian reserve.
As premature recruitment of a follicle can cause an early follicular rise in estradiol, FSH may be falsely suppressed on day 3. For example, a “normal” day-3 FSH combined with an elevated day-3 17-beta estradiol level of 60 to 80 pg/mL is associated with a poor response to medical treatments for infertility.
Female reproductive aging
Aging of the female reproductive system is a central threat to fertility, and prompt assessment and referral are warranted for women age 35 or older who have been trying to conceive for more than 6 months. The ASRM recommends that women over age 40 be evaluated immediately.21
A prevailing misconception is that regular menstrual cycles correspond with normal fertility. In reality, women lose their ability to achieve a healthy live birth in the 5 to 10 years preceding menopause. Although all women who do not desire pregnancy should still use appropriate contraception to avoid unintended pregnancy, women who do desire pregnancy should be aware of these physiologic changes.
Classic age-related changes in ovarian reserve are accompanied by a steep rise in aneuploidy and miscarriage risk.22 This is particularly relevant as women increasingly delay childbearing in modern society. Loss of fertility begins at 32 and abruptly accelerates at age 3721; this fact is poorly communicated to and understood by patients. In a 2018 study of highly educated women, most respondents failed to identify that 45-year-old women can only rarely achieve a successful pregnancy.23
In recent decades, the percentage of women who delay childbearing until after age 35 has steadily increased. There is a widespread misconception that fertility treatments and assisted reproductive technology can compensate for female reproductive aging. Primary care physicians can play a central role in reminding couples that age remains the single greatest predictor of natural fertility and the chance of success with assisted reproduction.
Further, for women who desire future fertility and are without a partner, primary care physicians can counsel them regarding the availability of donor insemination or egg freezing. Studies confirm that women want clinicians to initiate information on reproductive health, and 80% of women undergoing elective egg-freezing for fertility preservation wished that they had done so at an earlier age.24,25
FEMALE PERITONEAL AND STRUCTURAL CAUSES
Women with endometriosis, fibroids, or a history of tubal disease have impaired fecundity. Pelvic imaging is an essential component of their evaluation. Although hysterosalpingography is the mainstay of tubal assessment, in select cases ultrasonography or hysteroscopy may be indicated.
Tubal disease and hysterosalpingography
Tubal disease remains one of the most common causes of infertility in the US females. In most cases, tubal damage is secondary to pelvic inflammatory disease from infection with gonorrhea or Chlamydia, or both.
Rates of confirmed tubal-factor infertility have been shown to increase with both the severity of the infection and the number of past infections.26 In a landmark study, 1 episode of pelvic inflammatory disease was associated with a 12% risk of tubal-factor infertility, whereas 3 infections carried a risk as high as 54%. Pelvic inflammatory disease is also known to increase the risk of ectopic pregnancy.
To assess tubal patency, hysterosalpingography, a radiographic procedure, is typically performed using fluoroscopy and injected contrast material. Some centers may offer sonohysterography as a radiation-free alternative, depending on sonographic skill and experience. Both tests are best scheduled in the window between the end of menstrual bleeding and ovulation. In practice, patients with regular cycles can typically schedule hysterosalpingography between cycle days 5 and 12.
In patients with known hydrosalpinx (a distended fallopian tube due to blockage) or a history of pelvic infection, doxycycline should be given before the procedure.27 Patients with demonstrated hydrosalpinx on hysterosalpingography should receive doxycycline 100 mg twice daily for 5 days to prevent posthysterosalpingography pelvic inflammatory disease.27 Patients with active pelvic or cervical infection should not undergo hysterosalpingography .
Women with confirmed hydrosalpinx or tubal obstruction can be referred for laparoscopy. Gynecologic surgeons will plan their approach based on whether the obstruction is proximal (near the uterus) or distal (near the ovary) as well as whether hydrosalpinx, abnormal tubal architecture, salpingitis isthmica nodosa, or peritubal adhesions are noted. Tubal surgery can be effective in mild cases of tubal disease; however, as in vitro fertilization is becoming more effective, patients with moderate or severe tubal disease are increasingly being referred directly for assisted reproductive technology. Before undergoing assisted reproductive technology, hydrosalpinx will need to be addressed, as it can decrease clinical pregnancy rates with in vitro fertilization.
Endometriosis
Endometriosis is found in 21% to 47% of women with subfertility28 and commonly causes pain, ovarian cysts, and tubal disease. There is often a delay of 7 to 8 years for diagnosis due to the misapprehension that severe dysmenorrhea is normal. Women with an affected first-degree family member are at substantially increased risk.
Although endometriosis is commonly thought to result from reflux of endometrial tissue into the peritoneal cavity with menses, there are multiple proposed mechanisms for the disease.29 The pathogenesis of endometriosis is enigmatic, and there are likely as yet undetermined immunologic and genetic predispositions that confer increased risk.
Common symptoms of endometriosis are dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, and pelvic pain, and these are sometimes accompanied by bowel and bladder symptoms. Pelvic examination classically demonstrates an immobile uterus and uterosacral nodularity; palpation of these nodules can elicit pain. On laparoscopy, endometriosis can range from minimal to severe; however, stage of endometriosis correlates poorly with reported symptoms.30
Consideration of surgery is based on clinical history, results of the pelvic examination, and possible findings on ultrasonography or hysterosalpingography. Although positive findings on imaging can support a plan for intervention, endometriosis is largely a peritoneal disease, and evidence of tubal damage or ovarian cysts is rarely evident on ultrasonography. In women with menstrual complaints (eg, dysmenorrhea, heavy menstrual bleeding, abnormal uterine bleeding) and a history of infertility, ultrasonography may be useful in determining the presence of uterine pathology such as ovarian cyst or endometrioma, large hydrosalpinx, polyp, or substantial fibroid burden—any of which may have a significant impact on female fertility.
In the absence of a reliable blood test or imaging study, the gold standard for the diagnosis of endometriosis continues to be laparoscopic surgery. Hormonal treatments for endometriosis symptoms are not effective in improving infertility and will preclude pregnancy. Laparoscopic surgery is more successful in improving pregnancy rates in women with advanced disease: pregnancy rates after surgery can be as high as 60% in women with ovarian endometriomas but are significantly lower in women with removal of minimal to mild disease.30,31 Women over age 35 or who present with low ovarian reserve and whose male partner has semen abnormalities should consider moving directly to assisted reproductive technology rather than pursuing endometriosis surgery.
MALE FACTOR INFERTILITY
Although male partners are often highly engaged in and supportive of the fertility evaluation, some are reluctant to undergo testing, and some wish to undergo semen analysis only after female factors have been ruled out. Our practice is to evaluate male factors immediately, due to the high contribution of male factors (up to 40% of cases) either alone or in combination with female factors.32
Men at particularly increased risk of semen abnormalities include those with a history of chemotherapy or radiation or exposure to toxins (eg, environmental exposures, alcohol, tobacco, illicit substances) and prescribed medications.
At a minimum, for the male partner, a reproductive history should be taken and a semen analysis ordered. Men should be directly queried about testosterone use, as this often-used anabolic steroid hormone can severely impair sperm production.
Men who have low sperm counts, motility, or morphology scores based on World Health Organization criteria should not be deemed “infertile,” as there is significant variation from one analysis to the next, and normal fertility has been reported in men with notably low sperm counts. Particular caution should be exercised in interpreting low morphology scores in men with normal counts and motility, as this parameter appears to have the least prognostic value in this context. Men with abnormal semen analyses should be referred to a specialist for further urologic evaluation and treatment.
Treatments for male factor infertility include surgery, steroid hormones, and possibly intrauterine insemination or assisted reproductive technology. In even the most challenging cases, male infertility is now largely treatable with intracytoplasmic sperm injection with assisted reproductive technology. While most advances in in vitro fertilization have been evolutionary, intracytoplasmic sperm injection was revolutionary. This breakthrough technology allows a single sperm to be injected directly into the oocyte. Sperm for this procedure can be obtained either from the ejaculate or from microsurgical testicular sperm extraction.
ANOVULATION
A thorough menstrual history can be informative, as most females of reproductive age have a fairly predictable 25-to-35-day monthly menstrual cycle. Women presenting with menstrual charting with this pattern do not require laboratory confirmation of ovulation. Basal body temperatures are rarely used currently, as they are time-consuming, can induce stress, and are confirmatory rather than predictive of ovulation. Endometrial biopsy for endometrial “dating” is no longer performed in infertile women.
If laboratory confirmation is desired, LH kit testing with a commercially available test or a luteal phase serum progesterone obtained 7 days after suspected ovulation can be obtained. A serum progesterone level higher than 3 ng/mL is indicative of ovulation.19 Due to the notable fluctuations in ovulatory-appearing progesterone levels over several hours, caution must be taken in interpreting a lower-normal level as indicative of a luteal phase insufficiency.
Polycystic ovary syndrome
Polycystic ovary syndrome is important to understand because it is a metabolic condition that predisposes patients to a variety of health risks. Along with gynecologic consequences such as infertility, abnormal uterine bleeding, and endometrial pathology, it is often accompanied by alterations in glucose and lipid metabolism, obesity, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease.35
Despite its name, the syndrome does not involve the presence of classic ovarian cysts. In fact, the cysts associated with polycystic ovary syndrome are dense accumulations of antral follicles arranged peripherally in the ovarian cortex; they should not be removed surgically as they represent the ovarian reserve.
Although ovaries that appear polycystic on transvaginal ultrasonography are often associated with the syndrome, they are not invariably present and are not absolutely required for the diagnosis of polycystic ovary syndrome based on the most commonly used criteria.35 Several diagnostic criteria have been proposed for polycystic ovary syndrome and its phenotypes. The 2003 revised Rotterdam criteria require 2 out of the following 3 features:
- Oligo-ovulation or anovulation
- Evidence of hyperandrogenism, whether clinical (eg, acne or hirsutism) or based on laboratory testing
- Polycystic-appearing ovaries on ultrasonography.
There is no single test that can diagnose the disease. Although polycystic ovary syndrome is often characterized by elevated LH levels, LH–FSH ratios, and fasting insulin levels, these are not diagnostic criteria. The diagnosis hinges on excluding other causes of anovulation such as thyroid disease, hyperprolactinemia, 21-hydroxylase deficiency, androgen-producing neoplasms, and Cushing syndrome. In addition to checking serum testosterone levels, irregular menstrual cycles and infertility should be assessed at minimum with measurement of TSH, prolactin, and day-3 FSH. Obese women should be screened for metabolic syndrome, which should include an assessment of impaired glucose tolerance with a 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test.36
Women with polycystic ovary syndrome are known to have insulin resistance, which is difficult to assess and is independent of their body mass index.37 They often report a family history of diabetes or a personal history of gestational diabetes or giving birth to infants who are large for gestational age. Although most women diagnosed with insulin resistance and anovulatory infertility will not yet have a diagnosis of diabetes, women with polycystic ovary syndrome are 3 to 7 times more likely to develop type 2 diabetes later in life37 and are at increased risk of lipid abnormalities, cardiovascular disease, and stroke. Therefore, interventions to address the compounding influences of polycystic ovary syndrome and obesity can improve fertility outcomes and help prevent long-term sequelae that accompany the syndrome.
Treatment for women with polycystic ovary syndrome attempting conception includes lifestyle modifications, medications for ovulation induction, and possible use of insulin sensitizers. Metformin alone is not effective as a single agent for achieving pregnancy.38 Diet, weight loss, and exercise can have dramatic effects on ovulation and pregnancy and should be highly encouraged.
Ovulation induction is often required in anovulatory women, either in combination with lifestyle modifications or used subsequently if modifications are not successful. Letrozole is advised as the initial agent in women with obesity and anovulatory infertility rather than clomiphene citrate; a side-by-side comparison demonstrated increased rates of ovulation and live birth with letrozole.39
Once-daily letrozole 2.5 mg or clomiphene 50 mg can be prescribed for 5 days, from cycle days 3 through 7 to cycle days 5 through 9. If this initial dosing fails to result in ovulation, the dose can be increased. Known adverse effects are hot flashes, headaches, ovarian cysts, and increased risk of multiple gestation.
Metformin should be considered as an adjunct to fertility treatments in women with polycystic ovary syndrome, especially those with obesity or impaired glucose tolerance, or if there is no response to standard ovulation induction.
Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (cystic enlargement of the ovaries with potentially dangerous fluid and electrolyte imbalances) can occur in women with polycystic ovary syndrome; however, it rarely occurs with oral medications.
For millions of couples, a primary care physician may be the first point of contact for fertility concerns. Statistics from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention indicate that 12% of women ages 15 to 44 received fertility services from 2006 to 2010.1 Despite seeking services, most couples requested only advice or testing rather than treatments such as ovulation-inducing medications, surgery, or, rarely, assisted reproductive technologies including in vitro fertilization. Based on these data, primary care physicians are in a unique position to offer guidance and provide fertility services in most circumstances without the need for referral.
This article reviews the answers to questions patients frequently ask, and outlines a practical framework for the evaluation and management of the infertile couple.
MANY PATIENTS SEEK INFORMATION
At least 1 million medical visits per year are for women seeking help in becoming pregnant, with the number increasing over the last several decades.1 Reasons for the increase include delayed childbearing and the effects of aging on the female reproductive system (“female reproductive aging”), as well as the availability of increasingly effective treatments for infertility.
While the prevalence of infertility in US couples is widely quoted as 10% to 15%,2 there is no estimate for the number of fertility-related questions patients routinely pose to care providers. These questions often relate to coital timing, use of lubricants, positioning, and the use of fertility trackers and ovulation predictors.
A 2017 study of women with 12 months of infertility found that only 8% sought subspecialist care vs care from a general physician or provider, indicating that generalists are most often the first point of contact.3 The majority (92%) of women responding to a survey regarding fertility-awareness education indicated a preference for immediate counseling from their general practitioner.4
Although some healthcare providers may consider infertility simply a quality-of-life issue, the World Health Organization classifies it as a disease, and as such it warrants identification, assessment, and intervention.5 Further, patients with infertility are known to experience considerable psychological distress related to their condition. In a comparison study, women with infertility experienced levels of psychological distress similar to the level in patients with cancer and patients with chronic medical illness.6
In the current era, general practitioners and women’s health specialists may also now address patients’ questions about reproductive aging and egg-freezing, which is now an established technology.7
FAILURE TO CONCEIVE AFTER 1 YEAR
As women approach age 40, the potential for fertility decreases rapidly and significantly. Women in their later 30s have only half the fertility of women in their early 20s.10 Misperceptions of aging and female fertility have been fueled by widely publicized celebrity births from women in their 40s and even 50s, without disclosing the use of frozen or donor eggs. This unfortunate fact affects women actively trying to conceive as well as women who wish to delay childbearing due to lack of a partner or for personal or professional reasons. Primary care physicians should be able to provide counseling relevant to female reproductive aging and make suitable and timely referrals for fertility preservation if indicated.
AN EMOTIONAL ISSUE
In approaching the couple with infertility, it is important to proceed with great sensitivity for the socioemotional context of this diagnosis. For both the male and female partner, infertility can be highly stigmatizing, and can be viewed as a personal or relationship failure.
Couples should be encouraged to ask embarrassing or uncomfortable questions. Although this may not be feasible in many circumstances, interviews should ideally be conducted with both partners individually as well as together, to allow sensitive issues to be shared. In some cases, a partner may be unaware of a history of a sexually transmitted infection, a prior abortion, the use of testosterone supplements or medications to enhance male sexual performance, or a vasectomy or tubal ligation during a previous relationship.
It is not unusual that the anxiety of infertility can cause decreased libido and sexual and erectile dysfunction. These issues can further complicate the problem of conceiving, and couples counseling is not uncommonly required.11 Patients are often reassured to know that they are not alone in their diagnosis.
LOOK FOR CLUES
Before embarking on a series of tests, the primary care physician can carefully evaluate for clues that may guide the diagnostic evaluation. The approach can be individualized based on the patient’s age, duration of subfertility (ie, how long they have been trying to become pregnant), and risk factors. But as a general rule, regardless of age, couples who have been trying to conceive for more than 1 year should be encouraged to pursue additional testing.
Because each month presents a new cycle of hope (often followed by intense disappointment), the prevailing sentiment to “just give it a little more time” must be countered by education and counseling. The primary care physician must increase awareness that lack of pregnancy in the stated time periods is a compelling reason for evaluation.
History-taking in the infertile couple should include a complete gynecologic and menstrual history. A history of sexually transmitted diseases that can cause tubal disease, such as gonorrhea and Chlamydia, is significant. Both partners should be assessed for a history of prior conceptions, past medical or surgical problems, medications, and exposures to environmental toxins including alcohol, tobacco, and drugs.
A detailed physical examination can provide clues to the cause of subfertility, especially if signs of obesity, androgen excess, or insulin resistance are present.
QUESTIONS OFTEN ASKED BY COUPLES TRYING TO CONCEIVE
Clinicians are frequently asked questions related to sexual practices and lifestyle in relation to fertility and should be comfortable responding to questions in these areas.
Does frequent ejaculation ‘use up’ my sperm?
Men should be reassured that frequent ejaculations do not decrease sperm counts; even daily ejaculation does not deplete the concentration of sperm. Male partners can be reassured that “saving up” is not an effective strategy; in fact, abstinence periods of greater than 5 days can adversely affect semen parameters.12
How often should we have sex?
Infrequent intercourse (< 1 time per week) reduces the monthly chance of conceiving.13 There does not seem to be a significant improvement in fecundity with daily intercourse vs intercourse on alternate days. Strict schedules surrounding intercourse may increase stress, and reassurance should be offered that intercourse need not be regimented. Every 1 to 2 days should suffice.
Are any sexual positions better for conception?
There is no evidence that particular coital positioning or remaining supine after intercourse improves fertility. Sperm can be found within the endocervix within seconds of ejaculation, irrespective of sexual position.
What is the window of fertility?
There is good evidence that the fertile window lasts approximately 6 days and closes after ovulation.13,14 Women with regular cycles can determine their typical day of ovulation based on menstrual tracking. Intercourse should begin about 6 days before ovulation and should continue every 1 to 2 days for 1 week to fully capture this window.
Should we change our lifestyle?
Couples seeking pregnancy should be advised to limit alcohol and caffeine use, completely abstain from cigarette smoking or illicit drug use, and maintain a healthy body mass index.
Very few data exist to support particular diets or supplements to promote fertility, including antioxidants and herbal remedies. Folic acid supplementation is recommended in all women attempting to conceive to reduce the incidence of birth defects.
Do lubricants reduce fertility?
Although there seem to be no differences in fecundity rates in couples using commercial lubricants, most water-based lubricants are best avoided in couples with infertility, as adverse effects on sperm have been demonstrated in vitro.15 If lubrication is needed, couples may try mineral oil, canola oil, or hydroxyetylcellulose-based lubricants (eg, Pre-seed).
Do fertility trackers work?
Many couples with primary infertility perceive that coital timing is critical and worry that their infertility is due to poorly timed intercourse; in fact, this is seldom the case.
Despite widespread marketing of urinary luteinizing hormone (LH) detection kits and electronic trackers and monitors, there is no clear evidence that these methods improve monthly rates of conception.
Women with a regular menstrual cycle should be encouraged to take notice when their cervical mucus appears clear and slippery (a sign of ovulation). Not all women are able to detect these fluctuations; however, for those who can, observing cervical mucus changes appears to be equivalent or superior to predictor kits in predicting conception.16
A PRACTICAL FRAMEWORK FOR EVALUATING THE INFERTILE COUPLE
To assess for the common factors identified in Table 1, the essential investigation of the infertile couple includes:
- Semen analysis
- Confirmation of ovulation
- Hysterosalpingography.
Consideration can also be given to ovarian reserve testing in women at risk of diminished ovarian reserve. The above investigation can be performed simultaneously to allow for prompt identification of any issues. Further, infertility is often a combination of problems (eg, anovulation in the woman together with a problem in the man), so an incomplete evaluation may overlook a coexisting diagnosis and lead to delays in treatment and pregnancy.
Tests that are no longer typically used in clinical practice are outlined in Table 2.
OVARIAN RESERVE TESTING AND FEMALE REPRODUCTIVE AGING
Ovarian reserve refers to the number of fertilizable oocytes that remain in the ovary. This reserve changes over time, and changes occur rapidly as women approach and enter their 30s. Though not the case in men, the age of the female partner is an independent risk factor for infertility. This discrepancy is due to loss of ovarian reserve, chromosome abnormalities in embryos, and the development of medical conditions with age that affect fertility.
Testing for ovarian reserve does not necessarily predict an overall inability to achieve a live birth,17 but it can predict response to exogenous gonadotropins and, to some degree, the chance for successful pregnancy with assisted reproductive technology.18
The ASRM states that testing for diminished ovarian reserve may provide useful information in women who have had a previous poor response to gonadotropins and in women planning assisted reproductive technology.19 The ASRM also indicates that the following are risk factors for diminished ovarian reserve, and clinicians may target the assessment accordingly19:
- Age 35 or older
- History of exposure to chemotherapy or pelvic radiation
- Family history of early menopause (age < 40)
- History of ovarian surgery
- Unexplained or idiopathic fertility.
Although several tests of ovarian reserve exist, either an antimullerian hormone (AMH) test or a combined cycle day-3 follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) and estradiol level are the 2 tests commonly used in clinical practice. Antral follicle counts are an ultrasonographic measure used by infertility specialists but rarely by primary care physicians. Assays such as inhibin are rarely ordered and have limited clinical utility.
The AMH test
Many reproductive endocrinologists rely on the AMH level as a single test of ovarian reserve as it is easy to obtain, has a relatively low cost, and offers stable results. AMH is produced by the granulosa cells of the ovarian antral follicles and is readily detected in serum samples.
Conveniently for the clinician, levels of this hormone remain stable throughout the menstrual cycle and therefore can be tested on any day and at any time of day. Lower serum AMH levels (< 1 ng/mL) have been shown to correspond to diminished ovarian stimulation with gonadotropins as well as decreased embryo quality and poor pregnancy outcomes with assisted reproductive technology.19
Nevertheless, despite overall stability, AMH levels can be falsely lowered in women using exogenous hormones or with a diagnosis of hypogonadotropic hypogonadism. Levels may be higher than expected in women with polycystic ovary syndrome due to higher numbers of antral and preantral follicles in the polycystic ovary.
The day-3 follicle-stimulating hormone test
FSH and 17-beta estradiol testing can be ordered in combination to assess function of the hypothalamic-pituitary-ovarian axis on day 3 of the menstrual cycle. There is some flexibility, however, and testing obtained on cycle day 2, 3, or 4 yields equivalent results.
Although there are no strict cutoffs, FSH levels that appear elevated (> 10–20 IU/L) are associated with lower chances of conceiving with in vitro fertilization in multiple studies.20
The test is limited by levels that may fluctuate cycle to cycle, and reassuring test results do not necessarily indicate that a woman will achieve a pregnancy. Although a serum estradiol value alone is not a useful test, it can be used in combination with day-3 FSH to screen for diminished ovarian reserve.
As premature recruitment of a follicle can cause an early follicular rise in estradiol, FSH may be falsely suppressed on day 3. For example, a “normal” day-3 FSH combined with an elevated day-3 17-beta estradiol level of 60 to 80 pg/mL is associated with a poor response to medical treatments for infertility.
Female reproductive aging
Aging of the female reproductive system is a central threat to fertility, and prompt assessment and referral are warranted for women age 35 or older who have been trying to conceive for more than 6 months. The ASRM recommends that women over age 40 be evaluated immediately.21
A prevailing misconception is that regular menstrual cycles correspond with normal fertility. In reality, women lose their ability to achieve a healthy live birth in the 5 to 10 years preceding menopause. Although all women who do not desire pregnancy should still use appropriate contraception to avoid unintended pregnancy, women who do desire pregnancy should be aware of these physiologic changes.
Classic age-related changes in ovarian reserve are accompanied by a steep rise in aneuploidy and miscarriage risk.22 This is particularly relevant as women increasingly delay childbearing in modern society. Loss of fertility begins at 32 and abruptly accelerates at age 3721; this fact is poorly communicated to and understood by patients. In a 2018 study of highly educated women, most respondents failed to identify that 45-year-old women can only rarely achieve a successful pregnancy.23
In recent decades, the percentage of women who delay childbearing until after age 35 has steadily increased. There is a widespread misconception that fertility treatments and assisted reproductive technology can compensate for female reproductive aging. Primary care physicians can play a central role in reminding couples that age remains the single greatest predictor of natural fertility and the chance of success with assisted reproduction.
Further, for women who desire future fertility and are without a partner, primary care physicians can counsel them regarding the availability of donor insemination or egg freezing. Studies confirm that women want clinicians to initiate information on reproductive health, and 80% of women undergoing elective egg-freezing for fertility preservation wished that they had done so at an earlier age.24,25
FEMALE PERITONEAL AND STRUCTURAL CAUSES
Women with endometriosis, fibroids, or a history of tubal disease have impaired fecundity. Pelvic imaging is an essential component of their evaluation. Although hysterosalpingography is the mainstay of tubal assessment, in select cases ultrasonography or hysteroscopy may be indicated.
Tubal disease and hysterosalpingography
Tubal disease remains one of the most common causes of infertility in the US females. In most cases, tubal damage is secondary to pelvic inflammatory disease from infection with gonorrhea or Chlamydia, or both.
Rates of confirmed tubal-factor infertility have been shown to increase with both the severity of the infection and the number of past infections.26 In a landmark study, 1 episode of pelvic inflammatory disease was associated with a 12% risk of tubal-factor infertility, whereas 3 infections carried a risk as high as 54%. Pelvic inflammatory disease is also known to increase the risk of ectopic pregnancy.
To assess tubal patency, hysterosalpingography, a radiographic procedure, is typically performed using fluoroscopy and injected contrast material. Some centers may offer sonohysterography as a radiation-free alternative, depending on sonographic skill and experience. Both tests are best scheduled in the window between the end of menstrual bleeding and ovulation. In practice, patients with regular cycles can typically schedule hysterosalpingography between cycle days 5 and 12.
In patients with known hydrosalpinx (a distended fallopian tube due to blockage) or a history of pelvic infection, doxycycline should be given before the procedure.27 Patients with demonstrated hydrosalpinx on hysterosalpingography should receive doxycycline 100 mg twice daily for 5 days to prevent posthysterosalpingography pelvic inflammatory disease.27 Patients with active pelvic or cervical infection should not undergo hysterosalpingography .
Women with confirmed hydrosalpinx or tubal obstruction can be referred for laparoscopy. Gynecologic surgeons will plan their approach based on whether the obstruction is proximal (near the uterus) or distal (near the ovary) as well as whether hydrosalpinx, abnormal tubal architecture, salpingitis isthmica nodosa, or peritubal adhesions are noted. Tubal surgery can be effective in mild cases of tubal disease; however, as in vitro fertilization is becoming more effective, patients with moderate or severe tubal disease are increasingly being referred directly for assisted reproductive technology. Before undergoing assisted reproductive technology, hydrosalpinx will need to be addressed, as it can decrease clinical pregnancy rates with in vitro fertilization.
Endometriosis
Endometriosis is found in 21% to 47% of women with subfertility28 and commonly causes pain, ovarian cysts, and tubal disease. There is often a delay of 7 to 8 years for diagnosis due to the misapprehension that severe dysmenorrhea is normal. Women with an affected first-degree family member are at substantially increased risk.
Although endometriosis is commonly thought to result from reflux of endometrial tissue into the peritoneal cavity with menses, there are multiple proposed mechanisms for the disease.29 The pathogenesis of endometriosis is enigmatic, and there are likely as yet undetermined immunologic and genetic predispositions that confer increased risk.
Common symptoms of endometriosis are dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, and pelvic pain, and these are sometimes accompanied by bowel and bladder symptoms. Pelvic examination classically demonstrates an immobile uterus and uterosacral nodularity; palpation of these nodules can elicit pain. On laparoscopy, endometriosis can range from minimal to severe; however, stage of endometriosis correlates poorly with reported symptoms.30
Consideration of surgery is based on clinical history, results of the pelvic examination, and possible findings on ultrasonography or hysterosalpingography. Although positive findings on imaging can support a plan for intervention, endometriosis is largely a peritoneal disease, and evidence of tubal damage or ovarian cysts is rarely evident on ultrasonography. In women with menstrual complaints (eg, dysmenorrhea, heavy menstrual bleeding, abnormal uterine bleeding) and a history of infertility, ultrasonography may be useful in determining the presence of uterine pathology such as ovarian cyst or endometrioma, large hydrosalpinx, polyp, or substantial fibroid burden—any of which may have a significant impact on female fertility.
In the absence of a reliable blood test or imaging study, the gold standard for the diagnosis of endometriosis continues to be laparoscopic surgery. Hormonal treatments for endometriosis symptoms are not effective in improving infertility and will preclude pregnancy. Laparoscopic surgery is more successful in improving pregnancy rates in women with advanced disease: pregnancy rates after surgery can be as high as 60% in women with ovarian endometriomas but are significantly lower in women with removal of minimal to mild disease.30,31 Women over age 35 or who present with low ovarian reserve and whose male partner has semen abnormalities should consider moving directly to assisted reproductive technology rather than pursuing endometriosis surgery.
MALE FACTOR INFERTILITY
Although male partners are often highly engaged in and supportive of the fertility evaluation, some are reluctant to undergo testing, and some wish to undergo semen analysis only after female factors have been ruled out. Our practice is to evaluate male factors immediately, due to the high contribution of male factors (up to 40% of cases) either alone or in combination with female factors.32
Men at particularly increased risk of semen abnormalities include those with a history of chemotherapy or radiation or exposure to toxins (eg, environmental exposures, alcohol, tobacco, illicit substances) and prescribed medications.
At a minimum, for the male partner, a reproductive history should be taken and a semen analysis ordered. Men should be directly queried about testosterone use, as this often-used anabolic steroid hormone can severely impair sperm production.
Men who have low sperm counts, motility, or morphology scores based on World Health Organization criteria should not be deemed “infertile,” as there is significant variation from one analysis to the next, and normal fertility has been reported in men with notably low sperm counts. Particular caution should be exercised in interpreting low morphology scores in men with normal counts and motility, as this parameter appears to have the least prognostic value in this context. Men with abnormal semen analyses should be referred to a specialist for further urologic evaluation and treatment.
Treatments for male factor infertility include surgery, steroid hormones, and possibly intrauterine insemination or assisted reproductive technology. In even the most challenging cases, male infertility is now largely treatable with intracytoplasmic sperm injection with assisted reproductive technology. While most advances in in vitro fertilization have been evolutionary, intracytoplasmic sperm injection was revolutionary. This breakthrough technology allows a single sperm to be injected directly into the oocyte. Sperm for this procedure can be obtained either from the ejaculate or from microsurgical testicular sperm extraction.
ANOVULATION
A thorough menstrual history can be informative, as most females of reproductive age have a fairly predictable 25-to-35-day monthly menstrual cycle. Women presenting with menstrual charting with this pattern do not require laboratory confirmation of ovulation. Basal body temperatures are rarely used currently, as they are time-consuming, can induce stress, and are confirmatory rather than predictive of ovulation. Endometrial biopsy for endometrial “dating” is no longer performed in infertile women.
If laboratory confirmation is desired, LH kit testing with a commercially available test or a luteal phase serum progesterone obtained 7 days after suspected ovulation can be obtained. A serum progesterone level higher than 3 ng/mL is indicative of ovulation.19 Due to the notable fluctuations in ovulatory-appearing progesterone levels over several hours, caution must be taken in interpreting a lower-normal level as indicative of a luteal phase insufficiency.
Polycystic ovary syndrome
Polycystic ovary syndrome is important to understand because it is a metabolic condition that predisposes patients to a variety of health risks. Along with gynecologic consequences such as infertility, abnormal uterine bleeding, and endometrial pathology, it is often accompanied by alterations in glucose and lipid metabolism, obesity, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease.35
Despite its name, the syndrome does not involve the presence of classic ovarian cysts. In fact, the cysts associated with polycystic ovary syndrome are dense accumulations of antral follicles arranged peripherally in the ovarian cortex; they should not be removed surgically as they represent the ovarian reserve.
Although ovaries that appear polycystic on transvaginal ultrasonography are often associated with the syndrome, they are not invariably present and are not absolutely required for the diagnosis of polycystic ovary syndrome based on the most commonly used criteria.35 Several diagnostic criteria have been proposed for polycystic ovary syndrome and its phenotypes. The 2003 revised Rotterdam criteria require 2 out of the following 3 features:
- Oligo-ovulation or anovulation
- Evidence of hyperandrogenism, whether clinical (eg, acne or hirsutism) or based on laboratory testing
- Polycystic-appearing ovaries on ultrasonography.
There is no single test that can diagnose the disease. Although polycystic ovary syndrome is often characterized by elevated LH levels, LH–FSH ratios, and fasting insulin levels, these are not diagnostic criteria. The diagnosis hinges on excluding other causes of anovulation such as thyroid disease, hyperprolactinemia, 21-hydroxylase deficiency, androgen-producing neoplasms, and Cushing syndrome. In addition to checking serum testosterone levels, irregular menstrual cycles and infertility should be assessed at minimum with measurement of TSH, prolactin, and day-3 FSH. Obese women should be screened for metabolic syndrome, which should include an assessment of impaired glucose tolerance with a 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test.36
Women with polycystic ovary syndrome are known to have insulin resistance, which is difficult to assess and is independent of their body mass index.37 They often report a family history of diabetes or a personal history of gestational diabetes or giving birth to infants who are large for gestational age. Although most women diagnosed with insulin resistance and anovulatory infertility will not yet have a diagnosis of diabetes, women with polycystic ovary syndrome are 3 to 7 times more likely to develop type 2 diabetes later in life37 and are at increased risk of lipid abnormalities, cardiovascular disease, and stroke. Therefore, interventions to address the compounding influences of polycystic ovary syndrome and obesity can improve fertility outcomes and help prevent long-term sequelae that accompany the syndrome.
Treatment for women with polycystic ovary syndrome attempting conception includes lifestyle modifications, medications for ovulation induction, and possible use of insulin sensitizers. Metformin alone is not effective as a single agent for achieving pregnancy.38 Diet, weight loss, and exercise can have dramatic effects on ovulation and pregnancy and should be highly encouraged.
Ovulation induction is often required in anovulatory women, either in combination with lifestyle modifications or used subsequently if modifications are not successful. Letrozole is advised as the initial agent in women with obesity and anovulatory infertility rather than clomiphene citrate; a side-by-side comparison demonstrated increased rates of ovulation and live birth with letrozole.39
Once-daily letrozole 2.5 mg or clomiphene 50 mg can be prescribed for 5 days, from cycle days 3 through 7 to cycle days 5 through 9. If this initial dosing fails to result in ovulation, the dose can be increased. Known adverse effects are hot flashes, headaches, ovarian cysts, and increased risk of multiple gestation.
Metformin should be considered as an adjunct to fertility treatments in women with polycystic ovary syndrome, especially those with obesity or impaired glucose tolerance, or if there is no response to standard ovulation induction.
Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (cystic enlargement of the ovaries with potentially dangerous fluid and electrolyte imbalances) can occur in women with polycystic ovary syndrome; however, it rarely occurs with oral medications.
- Chandra A, Copen CE, Stephen EH. Infertility service use in the United States: data from the National Survey of Family Growth, 1982–2010. Natl Health Stat Report 2014; (73):1–21. pmid:24467919
- Mosher WD, Pratt WF. Fecundity and infertility in the United States: incidence and trends. Fertil Steril 1991; 56(2):192–193. pmid:2070846
- Boltz MW, Sanders JN, Simonsen SE, Stanford JB. Fertility treatment, use of in vitro fertilization, and time to live birth based on initial provider type. J Am Board Fam Med 2017; 30(2):230–238. doi:10.3122/jabfm.2017.02.160184
- Hampton K, Mazza D. Fertility-awareness knowledge, attitudes and practices of women attending general practice. Aust Fam Physician 2015; 44(11):840–845. pmid:26590626
- Zegers-Hochschild F, Adamson GD, de Mouzon J, et al; International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology; World Health Organization. International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology (ICMART) and the World Health Organization (WHO) revised glossary of ART terminology, 2009. Fertil Steril 2009; 92(5):1520–1524. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.09.009
- Domar AD, Zuttermeister PC, Friedman R. The psychological impact of infertility: a comparison with patients with other medical conditions. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol 1993; 14(suppl):45–52. pmid:8142988
- Argyle CE, Harper JC, Davies MC. Oocyte cryopreservation: where are we now? Hum Reprod Update 2016; 22(4):440–449. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmw007
- Practice Committee of American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Definitions of infertility and recurrent pregnancy loss: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril 2013; 99(1):63. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.09.023
- Guttmacher AF. Factors affecting normal expectancy of conception. J Am Med Assoc 1956; 161(9):855–860. pmid:13319020
- Dunson DB, Baird DD, Colombo B. Increased infertility with age in men and women. Obstet Gynecol 2004; 103(1):51–56. doi:10.1097/01.AOG.0000100153.24061.45
- National Collaborating Centre for Women’s and Children’s Health (UK). Fertility: assessment and treatment for people with fertility problems. London: Royal College of Obstetricians & Gynaecologists; 2013. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK247932. Accessed May 6, 2019.
- Elzanaty S, Malm J, Giwercman A. Duration of sexual abstinence: epididymal and accessory sex gland secretions and their relationship to sperm motility. Hum Reprod 2005; 20(1):221–225. doi:10.1093/humrep/deh586
- Wilcox AJ, Weinberg CR, Baird DD. Timing of sexual intercourse in relation to ovulation. Effects on the probability of conception, survival of the pregnancy, and sex of the baby. N Engl J Med 1995; 333(23):1517–1521. doi:10.1056/NEJM199512073332301
- Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine in collaboration with the Society for Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility. Optimizing natural fertility: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril 2017; 107(1):52–58. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.09.029
- Kutteh WH, Chao CH, Ritter JO, Byrd W. Vaginal lubricants for the infertile couple: effect on sperm activity. Int J Fertil Menopausal Stud 1996; 41(4):400–404. pmid:8894797
- Bigelow JL, Dunson DB, Stanford JB, Ecochard R, Gnoth C, Colombo B. Mucus observations in the fertile window: a better predictor of conception than timing of intercourse. Hum Reprod 2004; 19(4):889–892. doi:10.1093/humrep/deh173
- Steiner AZ, Pritchard D, Stanczyk FZ, et al. Association between biomarkers of ovarian reserve and infertility among older women of reproductive age. JAMA 2017; 318(14):1367–1376. doi:10.1001/jama.2017.14588
- Broekmans FJ, Kwee J, Hendriks DJ, Mol BW, Lambalk CB. A systematic review of tests predicting ovarian reserve and IVF outcome. Hum Reprod Update 2006; 12(6):685–718. doi:10.1093/humupd/dml034
- Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Diagnostic evaluation of the infertile female: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril 2015; 103(6):e44–e50. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.03.019
- Sharara FI, Scott RT Jr, Seifer DB. The detection of diminished ovarian reserve in infertile women. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998; 179(3 Pt 1):804–812. pmid:9757994
- American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee on Gynecologic Practice and Practice Committee. Female age-related fertility decline. Committee Opinion No. 589. Fertil Steril 2014; 101(3):633–634. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.12.032
- Balasch J, Gratacós E. Delayed childbearing: effects on fertility and the outcome of pregnancy. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2012; 24(3):187–193. doi:10.1097/GCO.0b013e3283517908
- Hickman LC, Fortin C, Goodman L, Liu X, Flyckt R. Fertility and fertility preservation: knowledge, awareness and attitudes of female graduate students. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2018; 23(2):130–138. doi:10.1080/13625187.2018.1455085
- Lundsberg LS, Pal L, Gariepy AM, Xu X, Chu MC, Illuzzi JL. Knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding conception and fertility: a population-based survey among reproductive-age United States women. Fertil Steril 2014; 101(3):767–774. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.12.006
- Hodes-Wertz B, Druckenmiller S, Smith M, Noyes N. What do reproductive-age women who undergo oocyte cryopreservation think about the process as a means to preserve fertility? Fertil Steril 2013; 100(5):1343–1349. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.07.201
- Weström L, Joesoef R, Reynolds G, Hagdu A, Thompson SE. Pelvic inflammatory disease and fertility. A cohort study of 1,844 women with laparoscopically verified disease and 657 control women with normal laparoscopic results. Sex Transm Dis 1992; 19(4):185–192. pmid:1411832
- ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 195: prevention of infection after gynecologic procedures. Obstet Gynecol 2018; 131(6):e172–e189. doi:10.1097/AOG.0000000000002670
- Balasch J, Creus M, Fábregues F, et al. Visible and non-visible endometriosis at laparoscopy in fertile and infertile women and in patients with chronic pelvic pain: a prospective study. Hum Reprod 1996; 11(2):387–391. pmid:8671229
- Falcone T, Flyckt R. Clinical management of endometriosis. Obstet Gynecol 2018; 131(3):557–571. doi:10.1097/AOG.0000000000002469
- Flyckt R, Kim S, Falcone T. Surgical management of endometriosis in patients with chronic pelvic pain. Semin Reprod Med 2017; 35(1):54–64. doi:10.1055/s-0036-1597306
- Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Endometriosis and infertility: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril 2012; 98(3):591–598. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.05.031
- Thonneau P, Marchand S, Tallec A, et al. Incidence and main causes of infertility in a resident population (1,850,000) of three French regions (1988–1989). Hum Reprod 1991; 6(6):811–816. pmid:1757519
- Cooper TG, Noonan E, von Eckardstein S, et al. World Health Organization reference values for human semen characteristics. Hum Reprod Update 2010; 16(3):231–245. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmp048
- Practice Committee of American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Diagnostic evaluation of the infertile male: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril 2012; 98(2):294–301. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.05.033
- Rotterdam ESHRE/ASRM-Sponsored PCOS consensus workshop group. Revised 2003 consensus on diagnostic criteria and long-term health risks related to polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). Hum Reprod 2004; 19(1):41–47. pmid:14688154
- Falcone T, Finegood DT, Fantus IG, Morris D. Androgen response to endogenous insulin secretion during the frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test in normal and hyperandrogenic women. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1990; 71(6):1653–1657. doi:10.1210/jcem-71-6-1653
- Daniilidis A, Dinas K. Long term health consequences of polycystic ovarian syndrome: a review analysis. Hippokratia 2009; 13(2):90–92. pmid:19561777
- Legro RS, Barnhart HX, Schlaff WD, et al; Cooperative Multicenter Reproductive Medicine Network. Clomiphene, metformin, or both for infertility in the polycystic ovary syndrome. N Engl J Med 2007; 356(6):551–566. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa063971
- Legro RS, Brzyski RG, Diamond MP, et al; NICHD Reproductive Medicine Network. Letrozole versus clomiphene for infertility in the polycystic ovary syndrome. N Engl J Med 2014; 371(2):119–129. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1313517
- Chandra A, Copen CE, Stephen EH. Infertility service use in the United States: data from the National Survey of Family Growth, 1982–2010. Natl Health Stat Report 2014; (73):1–21. pmid:24467919
- Mosher WD, Pratt WF. Fecundity and infertility in the United States: incidence and trends. Fertil Steril 1991; 56(2):192–193. pmid:2070846
- Boltz MW, Sanders JN, Simonsen SE, Stanford JB. Fertility treatment, use of in vitro fertilization, and time to live birth based on initial provider type. J Am Board Fam Med 2017; 30(2):230–238. doi:10.3122/jabfm.2017.02.160184
- Hampton K, Mazza D. Fertility-awareness knowledge, attitudes and practices of women attending general practice. Aust Fam Physician 2015; 44(11):840–845. pmid:26590626
- Zegers-Hochschild F, Adamson GD, de Mouzon J, et al; International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology; World Health Organization. International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology (ICMART) and the World Health Organization (WHO) revised glossary of ART terminology, 2009. Fertil Steril 2009; 92(5):1520–1524. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.09.009
- Domar AD, Zuttermeister PC, Friedman R. The psychological impact of infertility: a comparison with patients with other medical conditions. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol 1993; 14(suppl):45–52. pmid:8142988
- Argyle CE, Harper JC, Davies MC. Oocyte cryopreservation: where are we now? Hum Reprod Update 2016; 22(4):440–449. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmw007
- Practice Committee of American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Definitions of infertility and recurrent pregnancy loss: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril 2013; 99(1):63. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.09.023
- Guttmacher AF. Factors affecting normal expectancy of conception. J Am Med Assoc 1956; 161(9):855–860. pmid:13319020
- Dunson DB, Baird DD, Colombo B. Increased infertility with age in men and women. Obstet Gynecol 2004; 103(1):51–56. doi:10.1097/01.AOG.0000100153.24061.45
- National Collaborating Centre for Women’s and Children’s Health (UK). Fertility: assessment and treatment for people with fertility problems. London: Royal College of Obstetricians & Gynaecologists; 2013. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK247932. Accessed May 6, 2019.
- Elzanaty S, Malm J, Giwercman A. Duration of sexual abstinence: epididymal and accessory sex gland secretions and their relationship to sperm motility. Hum Reprod 2005; 20(1):221–225. doi:10.1093/humrep/deh586
- Wilcox AJ, Weinberg CR, Baird DD. Timing of sexual intercourse in relation to ovulation. Effects on the probability of conception, survival of the pregnancy, and sex of the baby. N Engl J Med 1995; 333(23):1517–1521. doi:10.1056/NEJM199512073332301
- Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine in collaboration with the Society for Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility. Optimizing natural fertility: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril 2017; 107(1):52–58. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.09.029
- Kutteh WH, Chao CH, Ritter JO, Byrd W. Vaginal lubricants for the infertile couple: effect on sperm activity. Int J Fertil Menopausal Stud 1996; 41(4):400–404. pmid:8894797
- Bigelow JL, Dunson DB, Stanford JB, Ecochard R, Gnoth C, Colombo B. Mucus observations in the fertile window: a better predictor of conception than timing of intercourse. Hum Reprod 2004; 19(4):889–892. doi:10.1093/humrep/deh173
- Steiner AZ, Pritchard D, Stanczyk FZ, et al. Association between biomarkers of ovarian reserve and infertility among older women of reproductive age. JAMA 2017; 318(14):1367–1376. doi:10.1001/jama.2017.14588
- Broekmans FJ, Kwee J, Hendriks DJ, Mol BW, Lambalk CB. A systematic review of tests predicting ovarian reserve and IVF outcome. Hum Reprod Update 2006; 12(6):685–718. doi:10.1093/humupd/dml034
- Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Diagnostic evaluation of the infertile female: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril 2015; 103(6):e44–e50. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.03.019
- Sharara FI, Scott RT Jr, Seifer DB. The detection of diminished ovarian reserve in infertile women. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998; 179(3 Pt 1):804–812. pmid:9757994
- American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee on Gynecologic Practice and Practice Committee. Female age-related fertility decline. Committee Opinion No. 589. Fertil Steril 2014; 101(3):633–634. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.12.032
- Balasch J, Gratacós E. Delayed childbearing: effects on fertility and the outcome of pregnancy. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2012; 24(3):187–193. doi:10.1097/GCO.0b013e3283517908
- Hickman LC, Fortin C, Goodman L, Liu X, Flyckt R. Fertility and fertility preservation: knowledge, awareness and attitudes of female graduate students. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2018; 23(2):130–138. doi:10.1080/13625187.2018.1455085
- Lundsberg LS, Pal L, Gariepy AM, Xu X, Chu MC, Illuzzi JL. Knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding conception and fertility: a population-based survey among reproductive-age United States women. Fertil Steril 2014; 101(3):767–774. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.12.006
- Hodes-Wertz B, Druckenmiller S, Smith M, Noyes N. What do reproductive-age women who undergo oocyte cryopreservation think about the process as a means to preserve fertility? Fertil Steril 2013; 100(5):1343–1349. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.07.201
- Weström L, Joesoef R, Reynolds G, Hagdu A, Thompson SE. Pelvic inflammatory disease and fertility. A cohort study of 1,844 women with laparoscopically verified disease and 657 control women with normal laparoscopic results. Sex Transm Dis 1992; 19(4):185–192. pmid:1411832
- ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 195: prevention of infection after gynecologic procedures. Obstet Gynecol 2018; 131(6):e172–e189. doi:10.1097/AOG.0000000000002670
- Balasch J, Creus M, Fábregues F, et al. Visible and non-visible endometriosis at laparoscopy in fertile and infertile women and in patients with chronic pelvic pain: a prospective study. Hum Reprod 1996; 11(2):387–391. pmid:8671229
- Falcone T, Flyckt R. Clinical management of endometriosis. Obstet Gynecol 2018; 131(3):557–571. doi:10.1097/AOG.0000000000002469
- Flyckt R, Kim S, Falcone T. Surgical management of endometriosis in patients with chronic pelvic pain. Semin Reprod Med 2017; 35(1):54–64. doi:10.1055/s-0036-1597306
- Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Endometriosis and infertility: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril 2012; 98(3):591–598. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.05.031
- Thonneau P, Marchand S, Tallec A, et al. Incidence and main causes of infertility in a resident population (1,850,000) of three French regions (1988–1989). Hum Reprod 1991; 6(6):811–816. pmid:1757519
- Cooper TG, Noonan E, von Eckardstein S, et al. World Health Organization reference values for human semen characteristics. Hum Reprod Update 2010; 16(3):231–245. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmp048
- Practice Committee of American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Diagnostic evaluation of the infertile male: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril 2012; 98(2):294–301. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.05.033
- Rotterdam ESHRE/ASRM-Sponsored PCOS consensus workshop group. Revised 2003 consensus on diagnostic criteria and long-term health risks related to polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). Hum Reprod 2004; 19(1):41–47. pmid:14688154
- Falcone T, Finegood DT, Fantus IG, Morris D. Androgen response to endogenous insulin secretion during the frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test in normal and hyperandrogenic women. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1990; 71(6):1653–1657. doi:10.1210/jcem-71-6-1653
- Daniilidis A, Dinas K. Long term health consequences of polycystic ovarian syndrome: a review analysis. Hippokratia 2009; 13(2):90–92. pmid:19561777
- Legro RS, Barnhart HX, Schlaff WD, et al; Cooperative Multicenter Reproductive Medicine Network. Clomiphene, metformin, or both for infertility in the polycystic ovary syndrome. N Engl J Med 2007; 356(6):551–566. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa063971
- Legro RS, Brzyski RG, Diamond MP, et al; NICHD Reproductive Medicine Network. Letrozole versus clomiphene for infertility in the polycystic ovary syndrome. N Engl J Med 2014; 371(2):119–129. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1313517
KEY POINTS
- A primary care physician can provide advice and testing regarding most fertility concerns.
- Female reproductive aging is a central threat to fertility, and prompt assessment and referral are warranted for women age 35 and older.
- Male factor infertility can now often be overcome with assisted reproductive technologies.
- Polycystic ovary syndrome can cause anovulation and has metabolic effects that can evolve into metabolic syndrome, with serious health consequences.
Long-term trend: Women receiving fewer pelvic exams
according to the National Center for Health Statistics.
Sixty-five percent of women aged 15-44 years had received a pelvic examination in the past year when asked in 1988 as part of the National Survey of Family Growth, but the 3-year average for the 2015-2017 surveys was 53%, a significant decline, the NCHS said in a recent report.
The decrease was seen in all three of the age subgroups – 15-20 years, 21-29 years, and 30-44 years – over the length of the study period, with the trend in only the oldest women not reaching significance. The 30-44 group also was the only one of the three in which the rate ever increased at any point, the survey data show.
Data for other subgroups focused on the last 3-year period. From 2015 to 2017, non-Hispanic black women were more likely to have received a pelvic examination in the past year (60%) than were non-Hispanic white (54%) or Hispanic women (45%). An association with education level also was seen: Women with a bachelor’s degree or higher were most likely to get an exam (69%), and those with less than a high-school degree were least likely (52%), the researchers reported.
In 2018, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists altered its recommendation that annual pelvic examinations be part of the well-woman visit for those aged 21 years and over, advising instead “that pelvic examinations be performed when indicated by medical history or symptoms,” the NCHS authors explained. They also suggested that their data “could provide a benchmark for estimates of the prevalence of pelvic examinations before the 2018 ACOG-updated guidelines.”
according to the National Center for Health Statistics.
Sixty-five percent of women aged 15-44 years had received a pelvic examination in the past year when asked in 1988 as part of the National Survey of Family Growth, but the 3-year average for the 2015-2017 surveys was 53%, a significant decline, the NCHS said in a recent report.
The decrease was seen in all three of the age subgroups – 15-20 years, 21-29 years, and 30-44 years – over the length of the study period, with the trend in only the oldest women not reaching significance. The 30-44 group also was the only one of the three in which the rate ever increased at any point, the survey data show.
Data for other subgroups focused on the last 3-year period. From 2015 to 2017, non-Hispanic black women were more likely to have received a pelvic examination in the past year (60%) than were non-Hispanic white (54%) or Hispanic women (45%). An association with education level also was seen: Women with a bachelor’s degree or higher were most likely to get an exam (69%), and those with less than a high-school degree were least likely (52%), the researchers reported.
In 2018, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists altered its recommendation that annual pelvic examinations be part of the well-woman visit for those aged 21 years and over, advising instead “that pelvic examinations be performed when indicated by medical history or symptoms,” the NCHS authors explained. They also suggested that their data “could provide a benchmark for estimates of the prevalence of pelvic examinations before the 2018 ACOG-updated guidelines.”
according to the National Center for Health Statistics.
Sixty-five percent of women aged 15-44 years had received a pelvic examination in the past year when asked in 1988 as part of the National Survey of Family Growth, but the 3-year average for the 2015-2017 surveys was 53%, a significant decline, the NCHS said in a recent report.
The decrease was seen in all three of the age subgroups – 15-20 years, 21-29 years, and 30-44 years – over the length of the study period, with the trend in only the oldest women not reaching significance. The 30-44 group also was the only one of the three in which the rate ever increased at any point, the survey data show.
Data for other subgroups focused on the last 3-year period. From 2015 to 2017, non-Hispanic black women were more likely to have received a pelvic examination in the past year (60%) than were non-Hispanic white (54%) or Hispanic women (45%). An association with education level also was seen: Women with a bachelor’s degree or higher were most likely to get an exam (69%), and those with less than a high-school degree were least likely (52%), the researchers reported.
In 2018, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists altered its recommendation that annual pelvic examinations be part of the well-woman visit for those aged 21 years and over, advising instead “that pelvic examinations be performed when indicated by medical history or symptoms,” the NCHS authors explained. They also suggested that their data “could provide a benchmark for estimates of the prevalence of pelvic examinations before the 2018 ACOG-updated guidelines.”
Dr. Eve Espey: Some good news in her 2019 contraceptive update
NASHVILLE, TENN. – There’s some good news on the contraception and reproductive health front, according to a recent update from Eve Espey, MD.
The unintended pregnancy rate in the United States, including among adolescents and young women, is declining, and the U.S. abortion rate is at its lowest level since Roe v. Wade, she said at the annual clinical and scientific meeting of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
A 2016 article based on 2008-2011 data showed that after hovering around 50% for nearly 3 decades, the unintended pregnancy rate dropped “for the first time in a very long period of time,” said Dr. Espey, professor and chair of the department of obstetrics & gynecology, division of family planning at the University of New Mexico, Albuquerque (N Engl J Med. 2016; 374[9]:843-52).
“It doesn’t look that impressive – it basically went down to 45%, but considering the scope and the number of women who are affected by unplanned pregnancy, this is actually a huge public health achievement,” she said. “And I think ... in the next cycles of the [Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s] National Survey of Family Growth ... we’ll hopefully continue to see this and potentially more [decline].”
As for abortion rates, an increase occurred following Roe v. Wade, but rates are now down to pre-Roe levels.
“One of the things that we know about the abortion rate is that the most important determinant ... is access to contraceptives,” Dr. Espey said, noting that both the abortion and unintended pregnancy rate declines are attributable to better and more consistent use of contraceptives, increased abstinence as teens are waiting longer to have sex, and the “meteoric rise in long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) use.”
Importantly, while improvements in public health have traditionally only impacted upper-class white women, a reduction is finally occurring in disparities with women of color, but those disparities still remain,” she added. “Just like we’re focusing so much on this relative to maternal mortality, the same kinds of disparities occur in access to reproductive health.”
Dr. Espey also provided updates on other aspects of contraception.
IUDs and other LARC methods
The use of LARCs increased from 2% of contraceptive types used by reproductive-aged women in 2002 to 12% in 2012. The majority of that change was in IUD use, with a small increase in implant use, she said, noting that the latest data from the 2015-2017 cycle of the National Survey of Family Growth shows that the rate is now up to 16%.
“The rise has been nothing that I ever imagined that I would see, certainly in my professional career,” she said.
The huge impact of LARCs on the unintended pregnancy rate is attributable to consistent effectiveness over time, compared with an increasing failure rate over time with short-acting contraceptive methods, she said, explaining that while the failure rate with oral contraceptives is about 8%-9% over the first 3 years, it increases to 53% at 8 years.
It’s a matter of looking at both “typical use” effectiveness and continuation rates: LARCs have continuation rates of about 75%-85%; Depot-Provera, for example, has a 25%-30% continuation rate at 1 year, she noted.
Dr. Espey also attributed the gains to improved access via the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive mandate, which has been shown in numerous studies to have improved access and consistency of contraceptive use, but which is “currently being chipped away,” and to the federal Title X program that covers family planning care for low income women, including undocumented women.
“These two programs have made a huge impact for us, and I hope that we as ob.gyns. will continue to support them,” she said.
Reproductive justice
Despite their effectiveness, it is important to remember that LARC methods are not right for everyone, Dr. Espey said.
“It’s not all about effectiveness. Women have many reasons for accessing contraception, and our job is not to reduce unintended pregnancy. ... The idea really is that we empower women. ... We should really give choices and trust women to make the best choices for them,” she explained.
Barriers to IUD removal also should be eliminated, she noted, explaining that a woman who wants her IUD removed a month after insertion should have that option.
She said she has “changed her language,” from asking why a woman wants an $800 IUD removed after a month to asking whether she would like to hear about ways to make it better or if she is “just ready to have it removed.”
For those not interested in a discussion about birth control, she suggested providing information about the bedsider.org site.
“This is a great resource for patients,” she said, noting that it is available in both English and Spanish.
U.S. Medical Eligibility Criteria and Selected Practice Recommendations on contraceptive use
The MEC contraceptive guidance, a regularly updated, evidence-based project of the CDC, provides “best practices” information on candidate selection, or the “who” of contraceptive selection (who is a candidate for a particular method), Dr. Espy said, noting that it’s a “handy resource” for in-office use.
The SPR is more of a “how-to” guide that provides specifics on contraceptive use, such as when a woman can rely on the pill for contraception after she starts taking it, or how a woman should be followed after IUD placement, she said.
A free CDC app provides access to both.
Emergency contraception
The best overall emergency contraceptive method is the copper IUD, but often it is less accessible than oral methods, of which ulipristal acetate (ella), is the best choice, Dr. Espy said.
“Ulipristal is kind of a best-kept secret. It’s a selective estrogen-receptor modulator – it actually works better and longer than Plan B (levonorgestrel). What’s great about Plan B is that you can get it over the counter, but ulipristal delays ovulation longer,” she explained.
Contraceptives and obesity
Oral contraceptive efficacy is “so much more about adherence,” than about weight, she said.
With respect to the contraceptive patch, limited evidence suggests that obesity may reduce effectiveness, but “it’s still way better than barrier methods,” and for the contraceptive ring, no evidence suggests that obesity affects efficacy, she said.
For emergency contraception, evidence suggests that ulipristal is more effective than Plan B in women with high body mass index.
OTC contraceptive access
Pharmacy and OTC access are a good idea, Dr. Espy said.
“ACOG now supports both, which is great, and there are now a number of states where women can access contraception through the pharmacy. There are a lot of barriers there as well, and really the answer is OTC access,” she said. “There is a pill right now that is seeking [Food and Drug Administration] approval; it will be a progestin-only pill – the first one to be available over the counter, so I think this is something that we’ll see in the next 5-10 years.”
Additional future directions
One technology in development is a longer-acting injectable, such as a 6- or 9-month Depot-type shot.
Biodegradable implants also are in development. “What a cool idea – it just disappears in your arm, no need to remove it,” Dr. Espey said, adding that nonsurgical permanent sterilization is another possible advance, which would be “a holy grail.”
As for male contraception?
“I’ve been saying for about 25 years that in 5 years we’ll have a male contraceptive, so I’m not going to say it anymore with any kind of time frame, but it’s possible,” she said.
Dr. Espey reported having no financial disclosures.
NASHVILLE, TENN. – There’s some good news on the contraception and reproductive health front, according to a recent update from Eve Espey, MD.
The unintended pregnancy rate in the United States, including among adolescents and young women, is declining, and the U.S. abortion rate is at its lowest level since Roe v. Wade, she said at the annual clinical and scientific meeting of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
A 2016 article based on 2008-2011 data showed that after hovering around 50% for nearly 3 decades, the unintended pregnancy rate dropped “for the first time in a very long period of time,” said Dr. Espey, professor and chair of the department of obstetrics & gynecology, division of family planning at the University of New Mexico, Albuquerque (N Engl J Med. 2016; 374[9]:843-52).
“It doesn’t look that impressive – it basically went down to 45%, but considering the scope and the number of women who are affected by unplanned pregnancy, this is actually a huge public health achievement,” she said. “And I think ... in the next cycles of the [Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s] National Survey of Family Growth ... we’ll hopefully continue to see this and potentially more [decline].”
As for abortion rates, an increase occurred following Roe v. Wade, but rates are now down to pre-Roe levels.
“One of the things that we know about the abortion rate is that the most important determinant ... is access to contraceptives,” Dr. Espey said, noting that both the abortion and unintended pregnancy rate declines are attributable to better and more consistent use of contraceptives, increased abstinence as teens are waiting longer to have sex, and the “meteoric rise in long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) use.”
Importantly, while improvements in public health have traditionally only impacted upper-class white women, a reduction is finally occurring in disparities with women of color, but those disparities still remain,” she added. “Just like we’re focusing so much on this relative to maternal mortality, the same kinds of disparities occur in access to reproductive health.”
Dr. Espey also provided updates on other aspects of contraception.
IUDs and other LARC methods
The use of LARCs increased from 2% of contraceptive types used by reproductive-aged women in 2002 to 12% in 2012. The majority of that change was in IUD use, with a small increase in implant use, she said, noting that the latest data from the 2015-2017 cycle of the National Survey of Family Growth shows that the rate is now up to 16%.
“The rise has been nothing that I ever imagined that I would see, certainly in my professional career,” she said.
The huge impact of LARCs on the unintended pregnancy rate is attributable to consistent effectiveness over time, compared with an increasing failure rate over time with short-acting contraceptive methods, she said, explaining that while the failure rate with oral contraceptives is about 8%-9% over the first 3 years, it increases to 53% at 8 years.
It’s a matter of looking at both “typical use” effectiveness and continuation rates: LARCs have continuation rates of about 75%-85%; Depot-Provera, for example, has a 25%-30% continuation rate at 1 year, she noted.
Dr. Espey also attributed the gains to improved access via the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive mandate, which has been shown in numerous studies to have improved access and consistency of contraceptive use, but which is “currently being chipped away,” and to the federal Title X program that covers family planning care for low income women, including undocumented women.
“These two programs have made a huge impact for us, and I hope that we as ob.gyns. will continue to support them,” she said.
Reproductive justice
Despite their effectiveness, it is important to remember that LARC methods are not right for everyone, Dr. Espey said.
“It’s not all about effectiveness. Women have many reasons for accessing contraception, and our job is not to reduce unintended pregnancy. ... The idea really is that we empower women. ... We should really give choices and trust women to make the best choices for them,” she explained.
Barriers to IUD removal also should be eliminated, she noted, explaining that a woman who wants her IUD removed a month after insertion should have that option.
She said she has “changed her language,” from asking why a woman wants an $800 IUD removed after a month to asking whether she would like to hear about ways to make it better or if she is “just ready to have it removed.”
For those not interested in a discussion about birth control, she suggested providing information about the bedsider.org site.
“This is a great resource for patients,” she said, noting that it is available in both English and Spanish.
U.S. Medical Eligibility Criteria and Selected Practice Recommendations on contraceptive use
The MEC contraceptive guidance, a regularly updated, evidence-based project of the CDC, provides “best practices” information on candidate selection, or the “who” of contraceptive selection (who is a candidate for a particular method), Dr. Espy said, noting that it’s a “handy resource” for in-office use.
The SPR is more of a “how-to” guide that provides specifics on contraceptive use, such as when a woman can rely on the pill for contraception after she starts taking it, or how a woman should be followed after IUD placement, she said.
A free CDC app provides access to both.
Emergency contraception
The best overall emergency contraceptive method is the copper IUD, but often it is less accessible than oral methods, of which ulipristal acetate (ella), is the best choice, Dr. Espy said.
“Ulipristal is kind of a best-kept secret. It’s a selective estrogen-receptor modulator – it actually works better and longer than Plan B (levonorgestrel). What’s great about Plan B is that you can get it over the counter, but ulipristal delays ovulation longer,” she explained.
Contraceptives and obesity
Oral contraceptive efficacy is “so much more about adherence,” than about weight, she said.
With respect to the contraceptive patch, limited evidence suggests that obesity may reduce effectiveness, but “it’s still way better than barrier methods,” and for the contraceptive ring, no evidence suggests that obesity affects efficacy, she said.
For emergency contraception, evidence suggests that ulipristal is more effective than Plan B in women with high body mass index.
OTC contraceptive access
Pharmacy and OTC access are a good idea, Dr. Espy said.
“ACOG now supports both, which is great, and there are now a number of states where women can access contraception through the pharmacy. There are a lot of barriers there as well, and really the answer is OTC access,” she said. “There is a pill right now that is seeking [Food and Drug Administration] approval; it will be a progestin-only pill – the first one to be available over the counter, so I think this is something that we’ll see in the next 5-10 years.”
Additional future directions
One technology in development is a longer-acting injectable, such as a 6- or 9-month Depot-type shot.
Biodegradable implants also are in development. “What a cool idea – it just disappears in your arm, no need to remove it,” Dr. Espey said, adding that nonsurgical permanent sterilization is another possible advance, which would be “a holy grail.”
As for male contraception?
“I’ve been saying for about 25 years that in 5 years we’ll have a male contraceptive, so I’m not going to say it anymore with any kind of time frame, but it’s possible,” she said.
Dr. Espey reported having no financial disclosures.
NASHVILLE, TENN. – There’s some good news on the contraception and reproductive health front, according to a recent update from Eve Espey, MD.
The unintended pregnancy rate in the United States, including among adolescents and young women, is declining, and the U.S. abortion rate is at its lowest level since Roe v. Wade, she said at the annual clinical and scientific meeting of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
A 2016 article based on 2008-2011 data showed that after hovering around 50% for nearly 3 decades, the unintended pregnancy rate dropped “for the first time in a very long period of time,” said Dr. Espey, professor and chair of the department of obstetrics & gynecology, division of family planning at the University of New Mexico, Albuquerque (N Engl J Med. 2016; 374[9]:843-52).
“It doesn’t look that impressive – it basically went down to 45%, but considering the scope and the number of women who are affected by unplanned pregnancy, this is actually a huge public health achievement,” she said. “And I think ... in the next cycles of the [Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s] National Survey of Family Growth ... we’ll hopefully continue to see this and potentially more [decline].”
As for abortion rates, an increase occurred following Roe v. Wade, but rates are now down to pre-Roe levels.
“One of the things that we know about the abortion rate is that the most important determinant ... is access to contraceptives,” Dr. Espey said, noting that both the abortion and unintended pregnancy rate declines are attributable to better and more consistent use of contraceptives, increased abstinence as teens are waiting longer to have sex, and the “meteoric rise in long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) use.”
Importantly, while improvements in public health have traditionally only impacted upper-class white women, a reduction is finally occurring in disparities with women of color, but those disparities still remain,” she added. “Just like we’re focusing so much on this relative to maternal mortality, the same kinds of disparities occur in access to reproductive health.”
Dr. Espey also provided updates on other aspects of contraception.
IUDs and other LARC methods
The use of LARCs increased from 2% of contraceptive types used by reproductive-aged women in 2002 to 12% in 2012. The majority of that change was in IUD use, with a small increase in implant use, she said, noting that the latest data from the 2015-2017 cycle of the National Survey of Family Growth shows that the rate is now up to 16%.
“The rise has been nothing that I ever imagined that I would see, certainly in my professional career,” she said.
The huge impact of LARCs on the unintended pregnancy rate is attributable to consistent effectiveness over time, compared with an increasing failure rate over time with short-acting contraceptive methods, she said, explaining that while the failure rate with oral contraceptives is about 8%-9% over the first 3 years, it increases to 53% at 8 years.
It’s a matter of looking at both “typical use” effectiveness and continuation rates: LARCs have continuation rates of about 75%-85%; Depot-Provera, for example, has a 25%-30% continuation rate at 1 year, she noted.
Dr. Espey also attributed the gains to improved access via the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive mandate, which has been shown in numerous studies to have improved access and consistency of contraceptive use, but which is “currently being chipped away,” and to the federal Title X program that covers family planning care for low income women, including undocumented women.
“These two programs have made a huge impact for us, and I hope that we as ob.gyns. will continue to support them,” she said.
Reproductive justice
Despite their effectiveness, it is important to remember that LARC methods are not right for everyone, Dr. Espey said.
“It’s not all about effectiveness. Women have many reasons for accessing contraception, and our job is not to reduce unintended pregnancy. ... The idea really is that we empower women. ... We should really give choices and trust women to make the best choices for them,” she explained.
Barriers to IUD removal also should be eliminated, she noted, explaining that a woman who wants her IUD removed a month after insertion should have that option.
She said she has “changed her language,” from asking why a woman wants an $800 IUD removed after a month to asking whether she would like to hear about ways to make it better or if she is “just ready to have it removed.”
For those not interested in a discussion about birth control, she suggested providing information about the bedsider.org site.
“This is a great resource for patients,” she said, noting that it is available in both English and Spanish.
U.S. Medical Eligibility Criteria and Selected Practice Recommendations on contraceptive use
The MEC contraceptive guidance, a regularly updated, evidence-based project of the CDC, provides “best practices” information on candidate selection, or the “who” of contraceptive selection (who is a candidate for a particular method), Dr. Espy said, noting that it’s a “handy resource” for in-office use.
The SPR is more of a “how-to” guide that provides specifics on contraceptive use, such as when a woman can rely on the pill for contraception after she starts taking it, or how a woman should be followed after IUD placement, she said.
A free CDC app provides access to both.
Emergency contraception
The best overall emergency contraceptive method is the copper IUD, but often it is less accessible than oral methods, of which ulipristal acetate (ella), is the best choice, Dr. Espy said.
“Ulipristal is kind of a best-kept secret. It’s a selective estrogen-receptor modulator – it actually works better and longer than Plan B (levonorgestrel). What’s great about Plan B is that you can get it over the counter, but ulipristal delays ovulation longer,” she explained.
Contraceptives and obesity
Oral contraceptive efficacy is “so much more about adherence,” than about weight, she said.
With respect to the contraceptive patch, limited evidence suggests that obesity may reduce effectiveness, but “it’s still way better than barrier methods,” and for the contraceptive ring, no evidence suggests that obesity affects efficacy, she said.
For emergency contraception, evidence suggests that ulipristal is more effective than Plan B in women with high body mass index.
OTC contraceptive access
Pharmacy and OTC access are a good idea, Dr. Espy said.
“ACOG now supports both, which is great, and there are now a number of states where women can access contraception through the pharmacy. There are a lot of barriers there as well, and really the answer is OTC access,” she said. “There is a pill right now that is seeking [Food and Drug Administration] approval; it will be a progestin-only pill – the first one to be available over the counter, so I think this is something that we’ll see in the next 5-10 years.”
Additional future directions
One technology in development is a longer-acting injectable, such as a 6- or 9-month Depot-type shot.
Biodegradable implants also are in development. “What a cool idea – it just disappears in your arm, no need to remove it,” Dr. Espey said, adding that nonsurgical permanent sterilization is another possible advance, which would be “a holy grail.”
As for male contraception?
“I’ve been saying for about 25 years that in 5 years we’ll have a male contraceptive, so I’m not going to say it anymore with any kind of time frame, but it’s possible,” she said.
Dr. Espey reported having no financial disclosures.
EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM ACOG 2019
LARC prolongs interpregnancy intervals but doesn’t cut preterm birth risk
NASHVILLE, TENN. – when used between a first and second pregnancy, results of a retrospective cohort study suggest.
Of 35,754 women who had a first and second live birth between 2005 and 2015 and who received non-emergent care within 10 years of the first birth, 3,083 (9%) had evidence of interpregnancy LARC exposure and were significantly less likely to have short interpregnancy intervals than were 32,671 with either non-LARC contraceptive use or no record of contraceptive-related care (P less than .0001), Sara E. Simonsen, PhD, reported in a poster at the annual meeting of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
Intervals in those with intrapartum LARC use were 12 months or less in 4% of women, 13-18 months in 8%, 19-24 months in 11%, and greater than 24 months in 13%.
However, preterm birth, which occurred in 7% of first births and 6% of second births, was not lower among those with LARC exposure vs. those with no contraceptive encounters after adjustment for interpregnancy interval and a number of demographic factors, including education, presence of father, mother’s age, Hispanic ethnicity, fetal anomalies, and preterm birth history (adjusted odds ratio, 1.13), said Dr. Simonsen, a certified nurse midwife at the University of Utah Hospital, Salt Lake City.
“Preterm birth, a live birth at less than 37 weeks’ gestation, is a major determinant of poor neonatal outcomes,” she and her colleagues wrote. “Short interpregnancy interval, defined as less than 18 months, is an important risk factor for preterm birth.”
Given the increasing number of U.S. women who use highly effective LARCs to space pregnancies, she and her colleagues performed a retrospective cohort study of electronic medical records from two large health systems and linked them with birth and fetal death records to explore the relationship between interpregnancy LARC and both interpregnancy interval and preterm birth in the subsequent pregnancy.
“We did find that women who used LARC between their pregnancies were less likely to have a short interpregnancy interval, but in adjusted models ... we found no association with intrapartum LARC use and preterm birth in the second birth,” Dr. Simonsen said during an e-poster presentation at the meeting.
In fact, preterm birth in the second birth was most strongly associated with a prior preterm birth – a finding consistent with the literature, she and her colleagues noted.
Although the findings are limited by the use of retrospective data not designed for research, the data came from a large population-based sample representing about 85% of Utah births, they said.
The findings suggest that while LARC use may not reduce preterm birth risk, it “may contribute favorably to outcomes to the extent that having optimal interpregnancy interval does,” they wrote.
“‘We feel that these findings support providers counseling women on the full range of contraception options in the postpartum and not pushing [intrauterine devices,]” Dr. Simonsen added.
The related topic of immediate postpartum LARC use was addressed by Eve Espey, MD, in a separate presentation at the meeting.
Dr .Espey, professor and chair of the department of obstetrics and gynecology and director of the family planning fellowship at the University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, reported that immediate postpartum insertion of an intrauterine device (IUD) is highly cost-effective despite an expulsion rate of between 10% and 30%. She also addressed the value of postpartum LARC for reducing rapid-repeat pregnancy rates.
Payment models for immediate postpartum LARC are “very cumbersome,” but at the university, a persistent effort over 4 years has led to success. Immediate postpartum LARC is offered to women with Medicaid coverage, and payment is received in about 97% of cases, she said, adding that efforts are underway to help other hospitals “troubleshoot the issues.”
The lack of private insurance coverage for immediate postpartum LARC remains a challenge, but Dr. Espey said she remains “super enthusiastic” about its use.
“I think it’s going to take another 5 years or so [for better coverage], and honestly I think what we really need is an inpatient LARC CPT code to make this happen,” she said, urging colleagues to advocate for that within their American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists sections when possible.
Dr. Simonsen and Dr. Espey reported having no relevant disclosures.
NASHVILLE, TENN. – when used between a first and second pregnancy, results of a retrospective cohort study suggest.
Of 35,754 women who had a first and second live birth between 2005 and 2015 and who received non-emergent care within 10 years of the first birth, 3,083 (9%) had evidence of interpregnancy LARC exposure and were significantly less likely to have short interpregnancy intervals than were 32,671 with either non-LARC contraceptive use or no record of contraceptive-related care (P less than .0001), Sara E. Simonsen, PhD, reported in a poster at the annual meeting of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
Intervals in those with intrapartum LARC use were 12 months or less in 4% of women, 13-18 months in 8%, 19-24 months in 11%, and greater than 24 months in 13%.
However, preterm birth, which occurred in 7% of first births and 6% of second births, was not lower among those with LARC exposure vs. those with no contraceptive encounters after adjustment for interpregnancy interval and a number of demographic factors, including education, presence of father, mother’s age, Hispanic ethnicity, fetal anomalies, and preterm birth history (adjusted odds ratio, 1.13), said Dr. Simonsen, a certified nurse midwife at the University of Utah Hospital, Salt Lake City.
“Preterm birth, a live birth at less than 37 weeks’ gestation, is a major determinant of poor neonatal outcomes,” she and her colleagues wrote. “Short interpregnancy interval, defined as less than 18 months, is an important risk factor for preterm birth.”
Given the increasing number of U.S. women who use highly effective LARCs to space pregnancies, she and her colleagues performed a retrospective cohort study of electronic medical records from two large health systems and linked them with birth and fetal death records to explore the relationship between interpregnancy LARC and both interpregnancy interval and preterm birth in the subsequent pregnancy.
“We did find that women who used LARC between their pregnancies were less likely to have a short interpregnancy interval, but in adjusted models ... we found no association with intrapartum LARC use and preterm birth in the second birth,” Dr. Simonsen said during an e-poster presentation at the meeting.
In fact, preterm birth in the second birth was most strongly associated with a prior preterm birth – a finding consistent with the literature, she and her colleagues noted.
Although the findings are limited by the use of retrospective data not designed for research, the data came from a large population-based sample representing about 85% of Utah births, they said.
The findings suggest that while LARC use may not reduce preterm birth risk, it “may contribute favorably to outcomes to the extent that having optimal interpregnancy interval does,” they wrote.
“‘We feel that these findings support providers counseling women on the full range of contraception options in the postpartum and not pushing [intrauterine devices,]” Dr. Simonsen added.
The related topic of immediate postpartum LARC use was addressed by Eve Espey, MD, in a separate presentation at the meeting.
Dr .Espey, professor and chair of the department of obstetrics and gynecology and director of the family planning fellowship at the University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, reported that immediate postpartum insertion of an intrauterine device (IUD) is highly cost-effective despite an expulsion rate of between 10% and 30%. She also addressed the value of postpartum LARC for reducing rapid-repeat pregnancy rates.
Payment models for immediate postpartum LARC are “very cumbersome,” but at the university, a persistent effort over 4 years has led to success. Immediate postpartum LARC is offered to women with Medicaid coverage, and payment is received in about 97% of cases, she said, adding that efforts are underway to help other hospitals “troubleshoot the issues.”
The lack of private insurance coverage for immediate postpartum LARC remains a challenge, but Dr. Espey said she remains “super enthusiastic” about its use.
“I think it’s going to take another 5 years or so [for better coverage], and honestly I think what we really need is an inpatient LARC CPT code to make this happen,” she said, urging colleagues to advocate for that within their American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists sections when possible.
Dr. Simonsen and Dr. Espey reported having no relevant disclosures.
NASHVILLE, TENN. – when used between a first and second pregnancy, results of a retrospective cohort study suggest.
Of 35,754 women who had a first and second live birth between 2005 and 2015 and who received non-emergent care within 10 years of the first birth, 3,083 (9%) had evidence of interpregnancy LARC exposure and were significantly less likely to have short interpregnancy intervals than were 32,671 with either non-LARC contraceptive use or no record of contraceptive-related care (P less than .0001), Sara E. Simonsen, PhD, reported in a poster at the annual meeting of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
Intervals in those with intrapartum LARC use were 12 months or less in 4% of women, 13-18 months in 8%, 19-24 months in 11%, and greater than 24 months in 13%.
However, preterm birth, which occurred in 7% of first births and 6% of second births, was not lower among those with LARC exposure vs. those with no contraceptive encounters after adjustment for interpregnancy interval and a number of demographic factors, including education, presence of father, mother’s age, Hispanic ethnicity, fetal anomalies, and preterm birth history (adjusted odds ratio, 1.13), said Dr. Simonsen, a certified nurse midwife at the University of Utah Hospital, Salt Lake City.
“Preterm birth, a live birth at less than 37 weeks’ gestation, is a major determinant of poor neonatal outcomes,” she and her colleagues wrote. “Short interpregnancy interval, defined as less than 18 months, is an important risk factor for preterm birth.”
Given the increasing number of U.S. women who use highly effective LARCs to space pregnancies, she and her colleagues performed a retrospective cohort study of electronic medical records from two large health systems and linked them with birth and fetal death records to explore the relationship between interpregnancy LARC and both interpregnancy interval and preterm birth in the subsequent pregnancy.
“We did find that women who used LARC between their pregnancies were less likely to have a short interpregnancy interval, but in adjusted models ... we found no association with intrapartum LARC use and preterm birth in the second birth,” Dr. Simonsen said during an e-poster presentation at the meeting.
In fact, preterm birth in the second birth was most strongly associated with a prior preterm birth – a finding consistent with the literature, she and her colleagues noted.
Although the findings are limited by the use of retrospective data not designed for research, the data came from a large population-based sample representing about 85% of Utah births, they said.
The findings suggest that while LARC use may not reduce preterm birth risk, it “may contribute favorably to outcomes to the extent that having optimal interpregnancy interval does,” they wrote.
“‘We feel that these findings support providers counseling women on the full range of contraception options in the postpartum and not pushing [intrauterine devices,]” Dr. Simonsen added.
The related topic of immediate postpartum LARC use was addressed by Eve Espey, MD, in a separate presentation at the meeting.
Dr .Espey, professor and chair of the department of obstetrics and gynecology and director of the family planning fellowship at the University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, reported that immediate postpartum insertion of an intrauterine device (IUD) is highly cost-effective despite an expulsion rate of between 10% and 30%. She also addressed the value of postpartum LARC for reducing rapid-repeat pregnancy rates.
Payment models for immediate postpartum LARC are “very cumbersome,” but at the university, a persistent effort over 4 years has led to success. Immediate postpartum LARC is offered to women with Medicaid coverage, and payment is received in about 97% of cases, she said, adding that efforts are underway to help other hospitals “troubleshoot the issues.”
The lack of private insurance coverage for immediate postpartum LARC remains a challenge, but Dr. Espey said she remains “super enthusiastic” about its use.
“I think it’s going to take another 5 years or so [for better coverage], and honestly I think what we really need is an inpatient LARC CPT code to make this happen,” she said, urging colleagues to advocate for that within their American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists sections when possible.
Dr. Simonsen and Dr. Espey reported having no relevant disclosures.
REPORTING FROM ACOG 2019
Survey: Patient-provider communication regarding dyspareunia disappoints
NASHVILLE, TENN. – Many women with endometriosis experience dyspareunia, but they are largely unsatisfied when it comes to discussions with health care providers about their symptoms, the results of an online survey suggest.
Of 638 women with self-reported endometriosis who responded to the survey, 81% said they always or usually experience pain during intercourse, 51% described their pain as severe, and 49% said they experience pain lasting more than 24 hours, Roberta Renzelli-Cain, DO, reported during a poster session at the annual clinical and scientific meeting of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
“The results of our survey suggest that said Dr. Renzelli-Cain, director of the West Virginia National Center of Excellence in Women’s Health and an ob.gyn. at West Virginia University, Morgantown.
In fact, survey responses suggested that dyspareunia has a marked impact on quality of life; 69% of respondents said they find sexual intercourse unpleasant, 31% said they always or usually avoid intercourse, 44% strongly agreed that dyspareunia has affected their relationship with their spouse or partner, 63% said they worry that their spouse or partner will leave, and 63% said they feel depressed because of their dyspareunia, she and her colleagues found.
Most respondents (88%) discussed their symptoms with health care providers (HCPs), and 85% did so with their ob.gyn. Among the other HCPs who respondents spoke with about their dyspareunia were primary care physicians, nurse practitioners, emergency department doctors, fertility specialists, and pain specialists.
Among the reasons given for avoiding discussions with HCPs about painful intercourse were embarrassment (34% of respondents), thinking nothing would help (26%), the physician was a man (5%), and a feeling that the provider was not understanding (3%).
Overall, 18% of respondents said they received no advice from their HCPs regarding how to deal with their dyspareunia, and 39% found nothing that their HCPs suggested to be effective.
Advice given by HCPs included surgery, lubricant use, over-the-counter pain medication, and trying different sexual positions. The percentages of respondents receiving this advice, and the percentages who considered the advice effective, respectively, were 46%, 25% for surgery; 32%, 21% for lubricant use; 36%, 18% for OTC medication; and 21%, 14% for trying different sexual positions, the investigators said.
Importantly, 42% of respondent said they felt it would be easier to discuss dyspareunia if their HCP initiated the subject.
The findings are notable given that 6%-10% of women of childbearing age are affected by endometriosis, and about 30% of those women have related dyspareunia – a “challenging symptom associated with lower sexual functioning, as well as lower self-esteem, and body image,” the investigators wrote.
The 24-question English-language survey was conducted online among women aged 19 years or older who reported having endometriosis and dyspareunia. Participants were recruited via a social network for women with endometriosis (MyEndometriosisTeam.com) and invited by e-mail to participate.
Of the 32,865 invited participants, 361 U.S.-based women and 277 women from outside the United States completed the survey. Most (83%) were aged 19-29 years.
In this online survey, the majority of women reported suboptimal communication with HCPs when seeking help for dyspareunia, the investigators said, concluding that “these results were similar between the U.S.- and non-U.S.–based women, highlighting the need for better medical communication between patients and HCPs, and better advice for patients regarding dyspareunia.”
Dr. Renzelli-Cain reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
NASHVILLE, TENN. – Many women with endometriosis experience dyspareunia, but they are largely unsatisfied when it comes to discussions with health care providers about their symptoms, the results of an online survey suggest.
Of 638 women with self-reported endometriosis who responded to the survey, 81% said they always or usually experience pain during intercourse, 51% described their pain as severe, and 49% said they experience pain lasting more than 24 hours, Roberta Renzelli-Cain, DO, reported during a poster session at the annual clinical and scientific meeting of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
“The results of our survey suggest that said Dr. Renzelli-Cain, director of the West Virginia National Center of Excellence in Women’s Health and an ob.gyn. at West Virginia University, Morgantown.
In fact, survey responses suggested that dyspareunia has a marked impact on quality of life; 69% of respondents said they find sexual intercourse unpleasant, 31% said they always or usually avoid intercourse, 44% strongly agreed that dyspareunia has affected their relationship with their spouse or partner, 63% said they worry that their spouse or partner will leave, and 63% said they feel depressed because of their dyspareunia, she and her colleagues found.
Most respondents (88%) discussed their symptoms with health care providers (HCPs), and 85% did so with their ob.gyn. Among the other HCPs who respondents spoke with about their dyspareunia were primary care physicians, nurse practitioners, emergency department doctors, fertility specialists, and pain specialists.
Among the reasons given for avoiding discussions with HCPs about painful intercourse were embarrassment (34% of respondents), thinking nothing would help (26%), the physician was a man (5%), and a feeling that the provider was not understanding (3%).
Overall, 18% of respondents said they received no advice from their HCPs regarding how to deal with their dyspareunia, and 39% found nothing that their HCPs suggested to be effective.
Advice given by HCPs included surgery, lubricant use, over-the-counter pain medication, and trying different sexual positions. The percentages of respondents receiving this advice, and the percentages who considered the advice effective, respectively, were 46%, 25% for surgery; 32%, 21% for lubricant use; 36%, 18% for OTC medication; and 21%, 14% for trying different sexual positions, the investigators said.
Importantly, 42% of respondent said they felt it would be easier to discuss dyspareunia if their HCP initiated the subject.
The findings are notable given that 6%-10% of women of childbearing age are affected by endometriosis, and about 30% of those women have related dyspareunia – a “challenging symptom associated with lower sexual functioning, as well as lower self-esteem, and body image,” the investigators wrote.
The 24-question English-language survey was conducted online among women aged 19 years or older who reported having endometriosis and dyspareunia. Participants were recruited via a social network for women with endometriosis (MyEndometriosisTeam.com) and invited by e-mail to participate.
Of the 32,865 invited participants, 361 U.S.-based women and 277 women from outside the United States completed the survey. Most (83%) were aged 19-29 years.
In this online survey, the majority of women reported suboptimal communication with HCPs when seeking help for dyspareunia, the investigators said, concluding that “these results were similar between the U.S.- and non-U.S.–based women, highlighting the need for better medical communication between patients and HCPs, and better advice for patients regarding dyspareunia.”
Dr. Renzelli-Cain reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
NASHVILLE, TENN. – Many women with endometriosis experience dyspareunia, but they are largely unsatisfied when it comes to discussions with health care providers about their symptoms, the results of an online survey suggest.
Of 638 women with self-reported endometriosis who responded to the survey, 81% said they always or usually experience pain during intercourse, 51% described their pain as severe, and 49% said they experience pain lasting more than 24 hours, Roberta Renzelli-Cain, DO, reported during a poster session at the annual clinical and scientific meeting of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
“The results of our survey suggest that said Dr. Renzelli-Cain, director of the West Virginia National Center of Excellence in Women’s Health and an ob.gyn. at West Virginia University, Morgantown.
In fact, survey responses suggested that dyspareunia has a marked impact on quality of life; 69% of respondents said they find sexual intercourse unpleasant, 31% said they always or usually avoid intercourse, 44% strongly agreed that dyspareunia has affected their relationship with their spouse or partner, 63% said they worry that their spouse or partner will leave, and 63% said they feel depressed because of their dyspareunia, she and her colleagues found.
Most respondents (88%) discussed their symptoms with health care providers (HCPs), and 85% did so with their ob.gyn. Among the other HCPs who respondents spoke with about their dyspareunia were primary care physicians, nurse practitioners, emergency department doctors, fertility specialists, and pain specialists.
Among the reasons given for avoiding discussions with HCPs about painful intercourse were embarrassment (34% of respondents), thinking nothing would help (26%), the physician was a man (5%), and a feeling that the provider was not understanding (3%).
Overall, 18% of respondents said they received no advice from their HCPs regarding how to deal with their dyspareunia, and 39% found nothing that their HCPs suggested to be effective.
Advice given by HCPs included surgery, lubricant use, over-the-counter pain medication, and trying different sexual positions. The percentages of respondents receiving this advice, and the percentages who considered the advice effective, respectively, were 46%, 25% for surgery; 32%, 21% for lubricant use; 36%, 18% for OTC medication; and 21%, 14% for trying different sexual positions, the investigators said.
Importantly, 42% of respondent said they felt it would be easier to discuss dyspareunia if their HCP initiated the subject.
The findings are notable given that 6%-10% of women of childbearing age are affected by endometriosis, and about 30% of those women have related dyspareunia – a “challenging symptom associated with lower sexual functioning, as well as lower self-esteem, and body image,” the investigators wrote.
The 24-question English-language survey was conducted online among women aged 19 years or older who reported having endometriosis and dyspareunia. Participants were recruited via a social network for women with endometriosis (MyEndometriosisTeam.com) and invited by e-mail to participate.
Of the 32,865 invited participants, 361 U.S.-based women and 277 women from outside the United States completed the survey. Most (83%) were aged 19-29 years.
In this online survey, the majority of women reported suboptimal communication with HCPs when seeking help for dyspareunia, the investigators said, concluding that “these results were similar between the U.S.- and non-U.S.–based women, highlighting the need for better medical communication between patients and HCPs, and better advice for patients regarding dyspareunia.”
Dr. Renzelli-Cain reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
REPORTING FROM ACOG 2019
ACIP favors shared decision on pneumococcal vaccine for older adults
Pneumococcal vaccination with the 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) based on shared clinical decision making is recommended for immunocompetent adults aged 65 years and older who have not previously received PCV13, and all adults aged 65 years and older should continue to receive the pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23), according to a vote at a meeting of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.
The motion passed with an 11-1 vote after members voted down two other options to either discontinue or continue the current recommendation of PCV13 for all immunocompetent adults aged 65 years and older. The current recommendation for PCV13 for adults aged 65 years and older has been in place since 2014.
The pneumococcal work group assessed indirect effects of the pediatric PCV vaccination on older adults prior to 2014 and since 2014, and what additional benefits might be expected if routine vaccination of older adults continued.
“Indirect effects have been observed in all age groups” said Almea Matanock, MD, of the CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases. Although there were no safety concerns, the public health impact of continued vaccination of adults was minimal.
Although PCV13 resulted in a 75% reduction in vaccine-type invasive pneumococcal disease and a 45% reduction in vaccine-type nonbacteremic pneumonia in 2014, the annual number needed to vaccinate to prevent a single case of outpatient pneumonia was 2,600, said Dr. Matanock.
Dr. Matanock presented key issues from the Evidence to Recommendations Framework for and against the recommendation for PCV13 in older adults. Work group comments in favor of continuing the recommendation for PCV13 in older adults included effective disease prevention and the potential negative impact on the importance of adult vaccines if the vaccine was no longer recommended. However, some work group members and committee members expressed concern about resource allocation and steering vaccines away from younger age groups in whom they have been more consistently effective.
Paul Hunter, MD, of the City of Milwaukee Health Department, voted against the shared clinical decision making, and instead favored discontinuing the recommendation for PCV13 for older adults. “I think clinicians need a clear message,” he said, adding that “the public health bang for the buck is with the kids.”
“I think there was a recognition that the population level benefit is minimal,” said work group chair Grace Lee, MD.
Although the work group recognized some benefit for older adults, the burden of disease for PCV-specific disease is low, compared with all-cause pneumonia, said Dr. Lee of Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital at Stanford, Calif. However, the recommendation for shared clinical decision making allows for potential insurance coverage of the vaccine for adults who decide after discussion with their health care provider that they would benefit.
“We are still unpacking this construct” of shared clinical decision making, which in this case applies to adults without immunocompromising conditions, and is more of a provider assessment than a risk assessment, she said.
The ACIP members had no financial conflicts to disclose.
Pneumococcal vaccination with the 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) based on shared clinical decision making is recommended for immunocompetent adults aged 65 years and older who have not previously received PCV13, and all adults aged 65 years and older should continue to receive the pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23), according to a vote at a meeting of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.
The motion passed with an 11-1 vote after members voted down two other options to either discontinue or continue the current recommendation of PCV13 for all immunocompetent adults aged 65 years and older. The current recommendation for PCV13 for adults aged 65 years and older has been in place since 2014.
The pneumococcal work group assessed indirect effects of the pediatric PCV vaccination on older adults prior to 2014 and since 2014, and what additional benefits might be expected if routine vaccination of older adults continued.
“Indirect effects have been observed in all age groups” said Almea Matanock, MD, of the CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases. Although there were no safety concerns, the public health impact of continued vaccination of adults was minimal.
Although PCV13 resulted in a 75% reduction in vaccine-type invasive pneumococcal disease and a 45% reduction in vaccine-type nonbacteremic pneumonia in 2014, the annual number needed to vaccinate to prevent a single case of outpatient pneumonia was 2,600, said Dr. Matanock.
Dr. Matanock presented key issues from the Evidence to Recommendations Framework for and against the recommendation for PCV13 in older adults. Work group comments in favor of continuing the recommendation for PCV13 in older adults included effective disease prevention and the potential negative impact on the importance of adult vaccines if the vaccine was no longer recommended. However, some work group members and committee members expressed concern about resource allocation and steering vaccines away from younger age groups in whom they have been more consistently effective.
Paul Hunter, MD, of the City of Milwaukee Health Department, voted against the shared clinical decision making, and instead favored discontinuing the recommendation for PCV13 for older adults. “I think clinicians need a clear message,” he said, adding that “the public health bang for the buck is with the kids.”
“I think there was a recognition that the population level benefit is minimal,” said work group chair Grace Lee, MD.
Although the work group recognized some benefit for older adults, the burden of disease for PCV-specific disease is low, compared with all-cause pneumonia, said Dr. Lee of Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital at Stanford, Calif. However, the recommendation for shared clinical decision making allows for potential insurance coverage of the vaccine for adults who decide after discussion with their health care provider that they would benefit.
“We are still unpacking this construct” of shared clinical decision making, which in this case applies to adults without immunocompromising conditions, and is more of a provider assessment than a risk assessment, she said.
The ACIP members had no financial conflicts to disclose.
Pneumococcal vaccination with the 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) based on shared clinical decision making is recommended for immunocompetent adults aged 65 years and older who have not previously received PCV13, and all adults aged 65 years and older should continue to receive the pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23), according to a vote at a meeting of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.
The motion passed with an 11-1 vote after members voted down two other options to either discontinue or continue the current recommendation of PCV13 for all immunocompetent adults aged 65 years and older. The current recommendation for PCV13 for adults aged 65 years and older has been in place since 2014.
The pneumococcal work group assessed indirect effects of the pediatric PCV vaccination on older adults prior to 2014 and since 2014, and what additional benefits might be expected if routine vaccination of older adults continued.
“Indirect effects have been observed in all age groups” said Almea Matanock, MD, of the CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases. Although there were no safety concerns, the public health impact of continued vaccination of adults was minimal.
Although PCV13 resulted in a 75% reduction in vaccine-type invasive pneumococcal disease and a 45% reduction in vaccine-type nonbacteremic pneumonia in 2014, the annual number needed to vaccinate to prevent a single case of outpatient pneumonia was 2,600, said Dr. Matanock.
Dr. Matanock presented key issues from the Evidence to Recommendations Framework for and against the recommendation for PCV13 in older adults. Work group comments in favor of continuing the recommendation for PCV13 in older adults included effective disease prevention and the potential negative impact on the importance of adult vaccines if the vaccine was no longer recommended. However, some work group members and committee members expressed concern about resource allocation and steering vaccines away from younger age groups in whom they have been more consistently effective.
Paul Hunter, MD, of the City of Milwaukee Health Department, voted against the shared clinical decision making, and instead favored discontinuing the recommendation for PCV13 for older adults. “I think clinicians need a clear message,” he said, adding that “the public health bang for the buck is with the kids.”
“I think there was a recognition that the population level benefit is minimal,” said work group chair Grace Lee, MD.
Although the work group recognized some benefit for older adults, the burden of disease for PCV-specific disease is low, compared with all-cause pneumonia, said Dr. Lee of Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital at Stanford, Calif. However, the recommendation for shared clinical decision making allows for potential insurance coverage of the vaccine for adults who decide after discussion with their health care provider that they would benefit.
“We are still unpacking this construct” of shared clinical decision making, which in this case applies to adults without immunocompromising conditions, and is more of a provider assessment than a risk assessment, she said.
The ACIP members had no financial conflicts to disclose.
REPORTING FROM AN ACIP MEETING
ACIP extends HPV vaccine coverage
according to a unanimous vote at a meeting of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.
This change affects males aged 22 through 26 years; the HPV vaccine is currently recommended for males and females aged 11 or 12 years, with catch-up vaccination through age 21 for males and age 26 for females.
The change was supported in part by increased interest in simplifying and harmonizing the vaccine schedule, said Lauri Markowitz, MD, of the CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases (NCIRD), who presented the HPV work group’s considerations.
In addition, the committee voted 10-4 in favor of catch-up HPV vaccination, based on shared clinical decision making, for all adults aged 27 through 45 years.
Although the current program of HPV vaccination for youth has demonstrated effectiveness, data from multiple models suggest that widespread HPV vaccination for adults older than 26 years is much less cost effective, and would yield relatively small additional health benefits, Dr. Markowitz said.
The HPV work group reviewed data from a range of clinical trials, epidemiology, and natural history, as well as results from five different health economic models. They concluded that an assessment of benefits and harms favors expanding the catch-up vaccination to all individuals through 26 years, said Elissa Meites, MD, of the CDC, who presented the official work group opinion. The group’s opinion on the second question was that the additional population level benefit of expanding HPV vaccination to all adults would be minimal and not a reasonable and effective allocation of resources, but that shared clinical decision making would allow flexibility.
The committee expressed strong opinions about the potential for shared clinical decision making as a policy for vaccination for adults older than 26 years. Some felt that this option was a way to include adults at risk for HPV, such as divorced women with new partners, or women getting married for the first time later in life who might not have been exposed to HPV through other relationships. In addition, supporters noted that the shared clinical decision-making option would allow for potential insurance coverage, and would involve discussion between doctors and patients to assess risk.
However, other committee members felt that any recommendation for older adult vaccination would distract clinicians from the importance and value of HPV vaccination for the target age group of 11- and 12-year-olds, and might divert resources from the younger age group in whom it has shown the most benefit.
Resource allocation was a concern voiced by many committee members. Kelly Moore, MD, MPH, of Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tenn., said she voted no on expanding vaccination to older adults because “we didn’t have details on shared clinical decision making, in the absence of information on what that meant, and in the presence of supply questions, I didn’t feel comfortable expanding vaccination to a huge population,” she said.
Paul Hunter, MD, of the City of Milwaukee Health Department, also voted no, and expressed concern that expanding the HPV vaccination recommendations to older adults would send the message that vaccination for children and teens is not effective or important.
The text of the new recommendations for routine and catch-up vaccination states that the recommendations “also apply to MSM [men who have sex with men], transgender people, and people with immunocompromising conditions.”
The ACIP members had no financial conflicts to disclose.
according to a unanimous vote at a meeting of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.
This change affects males aged 22 through 26 years; the HPV vaccine is currently recommended for males and females aged 11 or 12 years, with catch-up vaccination through age 21 for males and age 26 for females.
The change was supported in part by increased interest in simplifying and harmonizing the vaccine schedule, said Lauri Markowitz, MD, of the CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases (NCIRD), who presented the HPV work group’s considerations.
In addition, the committee voted 10-4 in favor of catch-up HPV vaccination, based on shared clinical decision making, for all adults aged 27 through 45 years.
Although the current program of HPV vaccination for youth has demonstrated effectiveness, data from multiple models suggest that widespread HPV vaccination for adults older than 26 years is much less cost effective, and would yield relatively small additional health benefits, Dr. Markowitz said.
The HPV work group reviewed data from a range of clinical trials, epidemiology, and natural history, as well as results from five different health economic models. They concluded that an assessment of benefits and harms favors expanding the catch-up vaccination to all individuals through 26 years, said Elissa Meites, MD, of the CDC, who presented the official work group opinion. The group’s opinion on the second question was that the additional population level benefit of expanding HPV vaccination to all adults would be minimal and not a reasonable and effective allocation of resources, but that shared clinical decision making would allow flexibility.
The committee expressed strong opinions about the potential for shared clinical decision making as a policy for vaccination for adults older than 26 years. Some felt that this option was a way to include adults at risk for HPV, such as divorced women with new partners, or women getting married for the first time later in life who might not have been exposed to HPV through other relationships. In addition, supporters noted that the shared clinical decision-making option would allow for potential insurance coverage, and would involve discussion between doctors and patients to assess risk.
However, other committee members felt that any recommendation for older adult vaccination would distract clinicians from the importance and value of HPV vaccination for the target age group of 11- and 12-year-olds, and might divert resources from the younger age group in whom it has shown the most benefit.
Resource allocation was a concern voiced by many committee members. Kelly Moore, MD, MPH, of Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tenn., said she voted no on expanding vaccination to older adults because “we didn’t have details on shared clinical decision making, in the absence of information on what that meant, and in the presence of supply questions, I didn’t feel comfortable expanding vaccination to a huge population,” she said.
Paul Hunter, MD, of the City of Milwaukee Health Department, also voted no, and expressed concern that expanding the HPV vaccination recommendations to older adults would send the message that vaccination for children and teens is not effective or important.
The text of the new recommendations for routine and catch-up vaccination states that the recommendations “also apply to MSM [men who have sex with men], transgender people, and people with immunocompromising conditions.”
The ACIP members had no financial conflicts to disclose.
according to a unanimous vote at a meeting of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.
This change affects males aged 22 through 26 years; the HPV vaccine is currently recommended for males and females aged 11 or 12 years, with catch-up vaccination through age 21 for males and age 26 for females.
The change was supported in part by increased interest in simplifying and harmonizing the vaccine schedule, said Lauri Markowitz, MD, of the CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases (NCIRD), who presented the HPV work group’s considerations.
In addition, the committee voted 10-4 in favor of catch-up HPV vaccination, based on shared clinical decision making, for all adults aged 27 through 45 years.
Although the current program of HPV vaccination for youth has demonstrated effectiveness, data from multiple models suggest that widespread HPV vaccination for adults older than 26 years is much less cost effective, and would yield relatively small additional health benefits, Dr. Markowitz said.
The HPV work group reviewed data from a range of clinical trials, epidemiology, and natural history, as well as results from five different health economic models. They concluded that an assessment of benefits and harms favors expanding the catch-up vaccination to all individuals through 26 years, said Elissa Meites, MD, of the CDC, who presented the official work group opinion. The group’s opinion on the second question was that the additional population level benefit of expanding HPV vaccination to all adults would be minimal and not a reasonable and effective allocation of resources, but that shared clinical decision making would allow flexibility.
The committee expressed strong opinions about the potential for shared clinical decision making as a policy for vaccination for adults older than 26 years. Some felt that this option was a way to include adults at risk for HPV, such as divorced women with new partners, or women getting married for the first time later in life who might not have been exposed to HPV through other relationships. In addition, supporters noted that the shared clinical decision-making option would allow for potential insurance coverage, and would involve discussion between doctors and patients to assess risk.
However, other committee members felt that any recommendation for older adult vaccination would distract clinicians from the importance and value of HPV vaccination for the target age group of 11- and 12-year-olds, and might divert resources from the younger age group in whom it has shown the most benefit.
Resource allocation was a concern voiced by many committee members. Kelly Moore, MD, MPH, of Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tenn., said she voted no on expanding vaccination to older adults because “we didn’t have details on shared clinical decision making, in the absence of information on what that meant, and in the presence of supply questions, I didn’t feel comfortable expanding vaccination to a huge population,” she said.
Paul Hunter, MD, of the City of Milwaukee Health Department, also voted no, and expressed concern that expanding the HPV vaccination recommendations to older adults would send the message that vaccination for children and teens is not effective or important.
The text of the new recommendations for routine and catch-up vaccination states that the recommendations “also apply to MSM [men who have sex with men], transgender people, and people with immunocompromising conditions.”
The ACIP members had no financial conflicts to disclose.
REPORTING FROM AN ACIP MEETING
CVD risk upped in postmenopausal breast cancer survivors
according to a new study of nearly 300 women.
Previous studies have shown that cardiovascular risk is greater among postmenopausal women treated for breast cancer compared with those without cancer, but specific risk factors have not been well studied, wrote Daniel de Araujo Brito Buttros, MD, of Paulista State University, Sao Paulo, Brazil, and colleagues.
In a study published in Menopause, the researchers evaluated several CVD risk factors in 96 postmenopausal women with breast cancer and 192 women without breast cancer, including metabolic syndrome, subclinical atherosclerosis, and heat shock proteins (HSP) 60 and 70.
Overall, breast cancer patients had significantly higher HSP60 levels and lower HSP70 levels than those of their cancer-free peers. These two proteins have an antagonistic relationship in cardiovascular disease, with HSP60 considered a risk factor for CVD, and HSP70 considered a protective factor. Average HSP60 levels for the breast cancer and control groups were 35 ng/mL and 10.8 ng/mL, respectively; average HSP70 levels were 0.5 ng/mL and 1.3 ng/mL, respectively.
Both diabetes and metabolic syndrome were significantly more common among breast cancer patients vs. controls (19.8% vs. 6.8% and 54.2% vs. 30.7%, respectively). Carotid artery plaque also was more common in breast cancer patients vs. controls (19.8% vs. 9.4%, respectively, P = 0.013).
In addition, systolic and diastolic blood pressure levels were significantly higher among the breast cancer patients, as were triglycerides and glucose.
The findings were limited by several factors including the cross-sectional design that could not prove a causal relationship between CVD risk and breast cancer, the researchers noted.
However, the results demonstrate the increased CVD risk for breast cancer patients, and “[therefore], women diagnosed with breast cancer might receive multidisciplinary care, including cardiology consultation at the time of breast cancer diagnosis and also during oncologic follow-up visits,” they said.
“Heart disease appears more commonly in women treated for breast cancer because of the toxicities of chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and use of aromatase inhibitors, which lower estrogen. Heart-healthy lifestyle modifications will decrease both the risk of recurrent breast cancer and the risk of developing heart disease,” JoAnn Pinkerton, MD, executive director of the North American Menopause Society, said in a statement. “Women should schedule a cardiology consultation when breast cancer is diagnosed and continue with ongoing follow-up after cancer treatments are completed,” she emphasized.
The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose.
SOURCE: Buttros DAB et al. Menopause. 2019. doi: 10.1097/GME.0000000000001348.
according to a new study of nearly 300 women.
Previous studies have shown that cardiovascular risk is greater among postmenopausal women treated for breast cancer compared with those without cancer, but specific risk factors have not been well studied, wrote Daniel de Araujo Brito Buttros, MD, of Paulista State University, Sao Paulo, Brazil, and colleagues.
In a study published in Menopause, the researchers evaluated several CVD risk factors in 96 postmenopausal women with breast cancer and 192 women without breast cancer, including metabolic syndrome, subclinical atherosclerosis, and heat shock proteins (HSP) 60 and 70.
Overall, breast cancer patients had significantly higher HSP60 levels and lower HSP70 levels than those of their cancer-free peers. These two proteins have an antagonistic relationship in cardiovascular disease, with HSP60 considered a risk factor for CVD, and HSP70 considered a protective factor. Average HSP60 levels for the breast cancer and control groups were 35 ng/mL and 10.8 ng/mL, respectively; average HSP70 levels were 0.5 ng/mL and 1.3 ng/mL, respectively.
Both diabetes and metabolic syndrome were significantly more common among breast cancer patients vs. controls (19.8% vs. 6.8% and 54.2% vs. 30.7%, respectively). Carotid artery plaque also was more common in breast cancer patients vs. controls (19.8% vs. 9.4%, respectively, P = 0.013).
In addition, systolic and diastolic blood pressure levels were significantly higher among the breast cancer patients, as were triglycerides and glucose.
The findings were limited by several factors including the cross-sectional design that could not prove a causal relationship between CVD risk and breast cancer, the researchers noted.
However, the results demonstrate the increased CVD risk for breast cancer patients, and “[therefore], women diagnosed with breast cancer might receive multidisciplinary care, including cardiology consultation at the time of breast cancer diagnosis and also during oncologic follow-up visits,” they said.
“Heart disease appears more commonly in women treated for breast cancer because of the toxicities of chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and use of aromatase inhibitors, which lower estrogen. Heart-healthy lifestyle modifications will decrease both the risk of recurrent breast cancer and the risk of developing heart disease,” JoAnn Pinkerton, MD, executive director of the North American Menopause Society, said in a statement. “Women should schedule a cardiology consultation when breast cancer is diagnosed and continue with ongoing follow-up after cancer treatments are completed,” she emphasized.
The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose.
SOURCE: Buttros DAB et al. Menopause. 2019. doi: 10.1097/GME.0000000000001348.
according to a new study of nearly 300 women.
Previous studies have shown that cardiovascular risk is greater among postmenopausal women treated for breast cancer compared with those without cancer, but specific risk factors have not been well studied, wrote Daniel de Araujo Brito Buttros, MD, of Paulista State University, Sao Paulo, Brazil, and colleagues.
In a study published in Menopause, the researchers evaluated several CVD risk factors in 96 postmenopausal women with breast cancer and 192 women without breast cancer, including metabolic syndrome, subclinical atherosclerosis, and heat shock proteins (HSP) 60 and 70.
Overall, breast cancer patients had significantly higher HSP60 levels and lower HSP70 levels than those of their cancer-free peers. These two proteins have an antagonistic relationship in cardiovascular disease, with HSP60 considered a risk factor for CVD, and HSP70 considered a protective factor. Average HSP60 levels for the breast cancer and control groups were 35 ng/mL and 10.8 ng/mL, respectively; average HSP70 levels were 0.5 ng/mL and 1.3 ng/mL, respectively.
Both diabetes and metabolic syndrome were significantly more common among breast cancer patients vs. controls (19.8% vs. 6.8% and 54.2% vs. 30.7%, respectively). Carotid artery plaque also was more common in breast cancer patients vs. controls (19.8% vs. 9.4%, respectively, P = 0.013).
In addition, systolic and diastolic blood pressure levels were significantly higher among the breast cancer patients, as were triglycerides and glucose.
The findings were limited by several factors including the cross-sectional design that could not prove a causal relationship between CVD risk and breast cancer, the researchers noted.
However, the results demonstrate the increased CVD risk for breast cancer patients, and “[therefore], women diagnosed with breast cancer might receive multidisciplinary care, including cardiology consultation at the time of breast cancer diagnosis and also during oncologic follow-up visits,” they said.
“Heart disease appears more commonly in women treated for breast cancer because of the toxicities of chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and use of aromatase inhibitors, which lower estrogen. Heart-healthy lifestyle modifications will decrease both the risk of recurrent breast cancer and the risk of developing heart disease,” JoAnn Pinkerton, MD, executive director of the North American Menopause Society, said in a statement. “Women should schedule a cardiology consultation when breast cancer is diagnosed and continue with ongoing follow-up after cancer treatments are completed,” she emphasized.
The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose.
SOURCE: Buttros DAB et al. Menopause. 2019. doi: 10.1097/GME.0000000000001348.
FROM MENOPAUSE
Sexual assault in military linked to sexual pain
according to an observational study involving interviews with more than 1,000 military women.
Female veterans with histories of both childhood sexual abuse and sexual assault in the military were 4.33 times more likely to report sexual pain than female veterans with no history of sexual assault; women whose history of sexual assault occurred in the military only were 2.37 times more likely to report sexual pain. Those with histories of childhood sexual abuse but no military assaults were 1.75 times more likely to report sexual pain than those who had no history of sexual assault.
The findings suggest that sexual assault in the military is more detrimental to sexual function than childhood sexual abuse alone, which “is distinct from the pattern long observed in civilian women that childhood sexual abuse confers a greater risk for sexual pain than adulthood sexual assault,” Carey S. Pulverman, PhD, then of the Department of Veterans Affairs Center of Excellence for Research on Returning War Veterans in Waco, Tex., and coinvestigators wrote in Obstetrics & Gynecology.
The findings come from a secondary analysis of data collected for a larger project titled Sexual Violence and Women Veterans’ Gynecologic Health . The research team conducted telephone interviews with 1,004 female veterans younger than 52 years of age (mean, 38 years) who were enrolled at two large Midwestern VA medical centers and associated clinics. Sexual pain was assessed by one question: “Does it hurt you to have sexual intercourse or penetration?”
The study also identified high comorbidity between sexual pain and mental health concerns. As with sexual pain, rates of depression and PTSD were highest among female veterans with histories of both sexual abuse in childhood and sexual assault in the military, followed by women with histories of sexual assaults in the military alone, and then women with histories of childhood sexual abuse alone. Women with both histories were 6.35 times more likely to report PTSD, and 3.91 times more likely to report depression, compared with female veterans with no history of sexual assault.
Women who experienced sexual assault during their childhood and/or while serving in the military also may have been exposed to sexual assault during their pre- or postmilitary adulthood as well, but this was a small number and its effects were not evaluated, the authors noted.
Especially given the “growing numbers of women serving in the military and prevalence of sexual assault in this population,” there’s a need for more research on the sexual function of female veterans and development of “targeted treatments,” the investigators wrote.
For now, providers should be “more comprehensive in their assessment of sexual assault history” and should consider developing relationships with community providers who specialize in sexual health, they added.
The study was funded by the VA. The authors did not report any relevant financial disclosures.
SOURCE: Pulverman CS et al. Obstet Gynecol. 2019;134:63-71.
according to an observational study involving interviews with more than 1,000 military women.
Female veterans with histories of both childhood sexual abuse and sexual assault in the military were 4.33 times more likely to report sexual pain than female veterans with no history of sexual assault; women whose history of sexual assault occurred in the military only were 2.37 times more likely to report sexual pain. Those with histories of childhood sexual abuse but no military assaults were 1.75 times more likely to report sexual pain than those who had no history of sexual assault.
The findings suggest that sexual assault in the military is more detrimental to sexual function than childhood sexual abuse alone, which “is distinct from the pattern long observed in civilian women that childhood sexual abuse confers a greater risk for sexual pain than adulthood sexual assault,” Carey S. Pulverman, PhD, then of the Department of Veterans Affairs Center of Excellence for Research on Returning War Veterans in Waco, Tex., and coinvestigators wrote in Obstetrics & Gynecology.
The findings come from a secondary analysis of data collected for a larger project titled Sexual Violence and Women Veterans’ Gynecologic Health . The research team conducted telephone interviews with 1,004 female veterans younger than 52 years of age (mean, 38 years) who were enrolled at two large Midwestern VA medical centers and associated clinics. Sexual pain was assessed by one question: “Does it hurt you to have sexual intercourse or penetration?”
The study also identified high comorbidity between sexual pain and mental health concerns. As with sexual pain, rates of depression and PTSD were highest among female veterans with histories of both sexual abuse in childhood and sexual assault in the military, followed by women with histories of sexual assaults in the military alone, and then women with histories of childhood sexual abuse alone. Women with both histories were 6.35 times more likely to report PTSD, and 3.91 times more likely to report depression, compared with female veterans with no history of sexual assault.
Women who experienced sexual assault during their childhood and/or while serving in the military also may have been exposed to sexual assault during their pre- or postmilitary adulthood as well, but this was a small number and its effects were not evaluated, the authors noted.
Especially given the “growing numbers of women serving in the military and prevalence of sexual assault in this population,” there’s a need for more research on the sexual function of female veterans and development of “targeted treatments,” the investigators wrote.
For now, providers should be “more comprehensive in their assessment of sexual assault history” and should consider developing relationships with community providers who specialize in sexual health, they added.
The study was funded by the VA. The authors did not report any relevant financial disclosures.
SOURCE: Pulverman CS et al. Obstet Gynecol. 2019;134:63-71.
according to an observational study involving interviews with more than 1,000 military women.
Female veterans with histories of both childhood sexual abuse and sexual assault in the military were 4.33 times more likely to report sexual pain than female veterans with no history of sexual assault; women whose history of sexual assault occurred in the military only were 2.37 times more likely to report sexual pain. Those with histories of childhood sexual abuse but no military assaults were 1.75 times more likely to report sexual pain than those who had no history of sexual assault.
The findings suggest that sexual assault in the military is more detrimental to sexual function than childhood sexual abuse alone, which “is distinct from the pattern long observed in civilian women that childhood sexual abuse confers a greater risk for sexual pain than adulthood sexual assault,” Carey S. Pulverman, PhD, then of the Department of Veterans Affairs Center of Excellence for Research on Returning War Veterans in Waco, Tex., and coinvestigators wrote in Obstetrics & Gynecology.
The findings come from a secondary analysis of data collected for a larger project titled Sexual Violence and Women Veterans’ Gynecologic Health . The research team conducted telephone interviews with 1,004 female veterans younger than 52 years of age (mean, 38 years) who were enrolled at two large Midwestern VA medical centers and associated clinics. Sexual pain was assessed by one question: “Does it hurt you to have sexual intercourse or penetration?”
The study also identified high comorbidity between sexual pain and mental health concerns. As with sexual pain, rates of depression and PTSD were highest among female veterans with histories of both sexual abuse in childhood and sexual assault in the military, followed by women with histories of sexual assaults in the military alone, and then women with histories of childhood sexual abuse alone. Women with both histories were 6.35 times more likely to report PTSD, and 3.91 times more likely to report depression, compared with female veterans with no history of sexual assault.
Women who experienced sexual assault during their childhood and/or while serving in the military also may have been exposed to sexual assault during their pre- or postmilitary adulthood as well, but this was a small number and its effects were not evaluated, the authors noted.
Especially given the “growing numbers of women serving in the military and prevalence of sexual assault in this population,” there’s a need for more research on the sexual function of female veterans and development of “targeted treatments,” the investigators wrote.
For now, providers should be “more comprehensive in their assessment of sexual assault history” and should consider developing relationships with community providers who specialize in sexual health, they added.
The study was funded by the VA. The authors did not report any relevant financial disclosures.
SOURCE: Pulverman CS et al. Obstet Gynecol. 2019;134:63-71.
FROM OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY