Journal of Korean Clinical Nursing Research (임상간호연구)

Hospital Nurses Association (병원간호사회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Experience of Decision Making about Selective Fetal Reduction among Women Who Conceived through Assisted Reproductive Techniques

보조생식술을 받은 여성의 선택적 태아감소술에 대한 의사결정 경험

  • Jang, HyeYoung (College of Nursing, Seoul National University) ;
  • Chung, ChaeWeon (College of Nursing, Research Institute of Nursing Science, Seoul National University)
  • 장혜영 (서울대학교 간호대학) ;
  • 정재원 (서울대학교 간호대학.간호과학연구소)
  • Received : 2017.09.29
  • Accepted : 2018.02.20
  • Published : 2018.04.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to explore and understand the experience of decision making among women undergoing or forgoing selective fetal reduction who have higher-order multiple pregnancies through assisted reproductive techniques. Methods: A qualitative study was conducted from August 1, to October 30, 2013. Eight participants were interviewed and the interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Six persons participated in in-depth interviews in person and two participated over the telephone. A thematic analysis was conducted. Results: Four themes were identified and carefully named: Confusion after higher-order multiple pregnancy; Obstacles to choice: Uncertain safety; Weighing between reality and ideality and; Influences of medical professionals. Conclusion: The results demonstrated a wide range of factors considered by women when making decisions about selective fetal reduction, and mothers' feelings of conflict and distress in the decision-making process. The results suggest that it is important for nurses to provide emotional support and consolation, in addition to sufficient information. These findings will help nurses improve their counseling techniques by understanding the situation of infertile couples.

Keywords

References

  1. Chang J. A primary study on preference of fertility policies based on perspectives of the marriage and having a child. Journal of the Korean Home Economics Association. 2005;43 (11):165-183.
  2. Shin HY, Bang ER. Individual values on childbirth and social view on childbirth encouragement policy. Journal of the Korean Home Economics Association. 2009;47(10):123-136.
  3. Ha JO. Criticism of the "National supporting program for infertility couples" as part of the low fertility rate policy. Korean Association of Women's Studies. 2012;28(1):35-69.
  4. National Health Insurance Service. 2008 National health insurance statistical yearbook [internet]. Seoul: National Health Insurance Service; 2009 [cited 2017 September 29]. Available from: http://www.nhis.or.kr/menu/boardRetriveMenuSet.xx?me nuId=F3321.
  5. Hwang NM, Hwang JH, Kim JE. Evaluation of the national supporting program for infertility couples and future policy directions in Korea. Seoul: Korea Institute for Health and Social Affairs; 2010.
  6. Cunningham FG, Leveno KJ, Bloom SL, Spong CY, Dashe JS, Hoffman BL, et al. Williams Obstetrics. 24th ed. New York: McGraw Hill Medical; 2014. p. 1358.
  7. Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology; American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Assisted reproductive technology in the United States: 2001 results generated from the American Society for Reproductive Medicine/Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology registry. Fertility and Sterility. 2007;87(6):1253-1266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2006.11.056
  8. Katz P, Nachtigall R, Showstack J. The economic impact of the assisted reproductive technologies. Nature Cell Biology. 2002; 4 Suppl:s29-32. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncb-nm-fertilityS29
  9. Al-Suleiman SA, Al-Jama FE, Rahman J, Rahman MS. Obstetric complications and perinatal outcome in triplet pregnancies. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2006;26(3):200-204. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443610500508295
  10. Dodd J, Crowther C. Multifetal pregnancy reduction of triplet and higher-order multiple pregnancies to twins. Fertility and Sterility. 2004;81(5):1420-1422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2003.11.028
  11. Elster N. Less is more: the risks of multiple births. Fertility and Sterility. 2000;74(4):617-623. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(00)00713-5
  12. Lee HR, Lee DS, Park EJ, Kim SH, Cheon DJ, Chae HD, et al. Perinatal outcomes of reduced twin pregnancies from triplet by multifetal pregnancy reduction in patients underwent in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer. Korean Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2001;44(3):472-477.
  13. Korean Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology. Obstetrics. 5th ed. Seoul: Gunja; 2015. p. 1102.
  14. Britt DW, Risinger ST, Mans M, Evans MI. Anxiety among women who have undergone fertility therapy and who are considering multifetal pregnancy reduction: trends and implications. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medi- cine. 2003;13(4):271-278. https://doi.org/10.1080/jmf.13.4.271.278
  15. Lipitz S, Mashiach S, Seidman DS. Multifetal pregnancy reduction: The case for non-directive patient counselling. Human Reproduction. 1994;9(11):1978-1979. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a138375
  16. Collopy KS. "I couldn't think that far": Infertile women's decision making about multifetal reduction. Research in Nursing & Health. 2004;27(2):75-86. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20012
  17. Maifeld M, Hahn S, Titler MG, Mullen M. Decision making regarding multifetal reduction. Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic, and Neonatal Nursing. 2003;32(3):357-369. https://doi.org/10.1177/0884217503253493
  18. Kim MH, Kim SH, Jee BC, Suh CS, Choi YM, Shin CJ, et al. Perinatal outcome in twin pregnancies after in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer: Comparison between reduced and non-reduced twins. Korean Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 1997;40(8):1586-1593.
  19. Kim SH, Jee BC, Chung KN, Kim HS, Ryu BY, Oh SK, et al. Prevention of multifetal pregignificance of embryo grading and cumulative embryo score. Korean Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 1995;nancy in In vitro fertilization and embryo transfer: S38(12):2333-2346.
  20. Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology. 2006;3(2):77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
  21. Luborsky MR. The identification and analysis of themes and patterns. In: Gubrium JF, Sankar A, editors. Qualitative methods in aging research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.; 1994. p. 189-210.
  22. Sandelowski M. The problem of rigor in qualitative research. Advances in Nursing Science. 1986;8(3):27-37. https://doi.org/10.1097/00012272-198604000-00005
  23. Little CM. Nursing considerations in the case of multifetal pregnancy reduction. The American Journal of Maternal Child Nursing. 2010;35(3):166-171. https://doi.org/10.1097/NMC.0b013e3181d765bc
  24. Britt DW, Evans MI. Sometimes doing the right thing sucks: frame combinations and multi-fetal pregnancy reduction decision difficulty. Social Science & Medicine. 2007;65(11): 2342-2356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.06.026
  25. Andrews LB. The clone age: adventures in the new world of reproductive technology. New York, NY: Henry Holt; 1999. p. 264.
  26. Dodd JM, Dowswell T, Crowther CA. Reduction of the number of fetuses for women with a multiple pregnancy. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2015;11:CD003932.
  27. Kwon I. A survey of Korean adults understanding of medical decision-making. Korean Journal of Medical Ethics. 2015;18 (3):251-261.
  28. Asplin N, Wessel H, Marions L, Georgsson Ohman S. Pregnancy termination due to fetal anomaly: Women's reactions, satisfaction and experiences of care. Midwifery. 2014;30 (6):620-627. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2013.10.013