MedElevator
Войти в исследования Journal of psychosomatic research · 2026
Biopsychosocial outcomes and quality of life in assisted reproduction: Conventional IVF versus in vitro maturation in women with PMOS.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sanmartín-Cuevas Verónica, Mostinckx Linde, García-Baquero Gonzalo, Agirregoitia Ekaitz, De Vos Michel, Agirregoitia Naiara
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Polyendocrine Metabolic Ovarian Syndrome (PMOS), formerly known as Polycystic Ovary Syndrome (PCOS) is the leading cause of anovulatory infertility worldwide and is associated with vulnerability to ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) under conventional stimulation. Women with PMOS frequently undergo in vitro fertilization (IVF), which involves intensive hormonal stimulation, or in vitro maturation (IVM), a minimal-stimulation alternative that eliminates OHSS risk. Despite their different burden profiles, comparative data on patient-centred outcomes between these protocols are scarce.
METHODS: A prospective, non-randomised clinical trial with two active treatment arms compared the biopsychosocial impact of IVF and IVM in 149 women with PMOS (IVF: n = 74; IVM: n = 75). Treatment was selected through shared decision-making, a process in which patients and clinicians jointly chose the protocol based on clinical profile and informed preferences. Anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) and fertility-related quality of life (FertiQoL) were assessed at baseline (T1), oocyte retrieval (T2), and end of cycle (T3). Physical symptoms were recorded at T2 and T3. Propensity score matching was applied to balance baseline characteristics.
RESULTS: No significant between-group differences were observed in anxiety, depression, or total quality of life. Women undergoing IVF reported significantly more adverse physical symptoms, more post-retrieval pain, lower couple relationship quality (FertiQoL Relational), and a trend toward lower treatment tolerability.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that differences between IVF and IVM in women with PMOS may emerge primarily in specific physical and relational dimensions of treatment burden, while broader psychological outcomes appear largely comparable across treatments.
METHODS: A prospective, non-randomised clinical trial with two active treatment arms compared the biopsychosocial impact of IVF and IVM in 149 women with PMOS (IVF: n = 74; IVM: n = 75). Treatment was selected through shared decision-making, a process in which patients and clinicians jointly chose the protocol based on clinical profile and informed preferences. Anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) and fertility-related quality of life (FertiQoL) were assessed at baseline (T1), oocyte retrieval (T2), and end of cycle (T3). Physical symptoms were recorded at T2 and T3. Propensity score matching was applied to balance baseline characteristics.
RESULTS: No significant between-group differences were observed in anxiety, depression, or total quality of life. Women undergoing IVF reported significantly more adverse physical symptoms, more post-retrieval pain, lower couple relationship quality (FertiQoL Relational), and a trend toward lower treatment tolerability.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that differences between IVF and IVM in women with PMOS may emerge primarily in specific physical and relational dimensions of treatment burden, while broader psychological outcomes appear largely comparable across treatments.