Infertility resolved with or without fertility treatment in Australian women aged 31-36 years: A prospective, population-based study [abstract]

Birth outcomes during a three year period were compared for women with a history of infertility who did or did not use fertility treatment with hormones and/or in vitro fertilisation. Participants in the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women’s Health born in 1973-78 were randomly selected from the universal public health insurance database and completed up to five mailed surveys (1996-2009). Participants reported on their infertility and use of treatment at age 28-33 years (survey 4 (S4) in 2006) and 31-36 years (survey 5 (S5) in 2009). The odds of resolved infertility at S5 were estimated using logistic regression with adjustment for age, area of residence, private health insurance and male infertility. Among 7280 women who responded to both S4 and S5, 18.6% (n=1378) reported infertility. More than half (n=804, 56.8%) of these women did not use treatment and 43.9% (n=347) gave birth between S4 and S5. Compared to infertile women who did not use treatment, women who used treatment were more likely at S5 to have recently given birth (odds ratio (OR) = 1.59, 95% CI 1.26-2.00) or be pregnant (OR = 1.77, 1.27-2.46). Further, women who used treatment were more likely to have twins (3.37, 1.18-9.62), premature births (1.52, 0.95-2.43), or low birthweight babies (1.83, 0.70-2.53) compared to women who gave birth without using treatment. Many women aged up to 36 years with a history of infertility can conceive naturally over a three year period without the use of treatment.Women who have never had a prior birth may need to use treatment to resolve their infertility but they are at higher risk of poorer perinatal outcomes, such as premature or low birthweight babies.

Agreement between self-reported use of in vitro fertilization or ovulation induction, and medical insurance claims in Australian women aged 28–36 years

STUDY QUESTION: What is the self-reported use of in vitro fertilization (IVF) and ovulation induction (OI) in comparison with insurance claims by Australian women aged 28–36 years? SUMMARY ANSWER: The self-reported use of IVF is quite likely to be valid; however, the use of OI is less well reported. WHAT IS KNOWN AND WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: Population-based research often relies on the self-reported use of IVF and OI because access to medical records can be difficult and the data need to include sufficient personal identifying information for linkage to other data sources. There have been few attempts to explore the reliability of the self-reported use of IVF and OI using the linkage to medical insurance claims for either treatment. STUDY DESIGN: This prospective, population-based, longitudinal study included the cohort of women born during 1973–1978 and participating in the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women's Health (ALSWH) (n = 14247). From 1996 to 2009, participants were surveyed up to five times. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Participants self-reported their use of IVF or OI in two mailed surveys when aged 28–33 and 31–36 years (n = 7280), respectively. This study links self-report survey responses and claims for treatment or medication from the universal national health insurance scheme (i.e. Medicare Australia). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Comparisons between self-reports and claims data were undertaken for all women consenting to the linkage (n = 3375). The self-reported use of IVF was compared with claims for OI for IVF (Kappa, K = 0.83), oocyte collection (K = 0.82), sperm preparation (K = 0.83), intracytoplasmic sperm injection (K = 0.40), fresh embryo transfers (K = 0.82), frozen embryo transfers (K = 0.64) and OI for IVF medication (K = 0.17). The self-reported use of OI was compared with ovulation monitoring (K = 0.52) and OI medication (K = 0.71). BIAS, CONFOUNDING AND OTHER REASONS FOR CAUTION: There is a possibility of selection bias due to the inclusion criteria for participants in this study: (1) completion of the last two surveys in a series of five and (2) consent to the linkage of their responses with Medicare data. GENERALIZABILITY TO OTHER POPULATIONS: The results are relevant to questionnaire-based research studies with infertile women in developed countries. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): ALSWH is funded by the Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing. This research is funded by a National Health and Medical Research Council Centre of Research Excellence grant.

Birth outcomes after spontaneous or assisted conception among infertile Australian women aged 28 to 36 years: A prospective, population-based study

Objective To examine the extent to which the odds of birth, pregnancy, or adverse birth outcomes are higher among women aged 28 to 36 years who use fertility treatment compared with untreated women. Design Prospective, population-based. Setting Not applicable. Patient(s) Participants in the ALSWH born in 1973 to 1978 who reported on their infertility and use of in vitro fertilization (IVF) or ovulation induction (OI). Intervention(s) Postal survey questionnaires administered as part of ALSWH. Main Outcome Measure(s) Among women treated with IVF or OI and untreated women, the odds of birth outcomes estimated by use of adjusted logistic regression modeling. Result(s) Among 7,280 women, 18.6% (n = 1,376) reported infertility. Half (53.0%) of the treated women gave birth compared with 43.8% of untreated women. Women with prior parity were less likely to use IVF compared with nulliparous women. Women using IVF or OI, respectively, were more likely to have given birth after treatment or be pregnant compared with untreated women. Women using IVF or OI were as likely to have ectopic pregnancies, stillbirths, or premature or low birthweight babies as untreated women. Conclusion(s) More than 40% of women aged 28–36 years reporting a history of infertility can achieve births without using treatment, indicating they are subfertile rather than infertile.

A prospective study of pregnancy weight gain in Australian women

Background: While weight gain during pregnancy is regarded as important, there has not been a prospective study of measured weight gain in pregnancy in Australia. This study aimed to prospectively evaluate pregnancy-related weight gain against the Institute of Medicine (IOM) recommendations in women receiving antenatal care in a setting where ongoing weight monitoring is not part of routine clinical practice, to describe women's knowledge of weight gain recommendations and to describe the health professional advice received relating to gestational weight gain (GWG). Methods: Pregnant women were recruited ≤20 weeks of gestation (n = 664) from a tertiary obstetric hospital between August 2010 to July 2011 for this prospective observational study. Outcome measures were weight gain from pre-pregnancy to 36 weeks of gestation, weight gain knowledge and health professional advice received. Results: Thirty-six percent of women gained weight according to guidelines. Twenty-six percent gained inadequate weight, and 38% gained excess weight. Fifty-six percent of overweight women gained weight in excess of the IOM guidelines compared with 30% of those who started with a healthy weight (P < 0.001). At 16 weeks, 47% of participants were unsure of the weight gain recommendations for them. Sixty-two percent of women reported that the health professionals caring for them during this pregnancy ‘never’ or ‘rarely’ offered advice about how much weight to gain. Conclusions: The prevalence of inappropriate gestational weight gain in this study was high. The majority of women do not know their recommended weight gain. The advice women received from health professionals relating to healthy weight gain in pregnancy could be improved.