4.5 Article

The effect of using complementary medicine on the infertility-specific quality of life of women undergoing in vitro fertilization

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2016.05.011

关键词

Complementary medicine; FertiQoL; IVF; Lifestyle behaviors; Quality of life

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To evaluate associations between the use of complementary medicine, quality of life (QoL), and lifestyle habits among women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF). Methods: In a cross-sectional study, women aged 18-44 years undergoing an IVF cycle at a large IVF center in Israel between February 1, 2013 and April 30, 2015 were invited to complete a self-administered questionnaire. Patients who reported using of at least one complementary medicine intervention to treat infertility prior to IVF treatment were considered complementary-medicine users. Fertility QoL and lifestyle behaviors were compared between complementary medicine users and non-users with the FertiQoL tools. Results: Of 381 patients eligible to participate in the study, 323 completed the questionnaire; 110 (34.1%) participants were complementary-medicine users. Complementary-medicine users demonstrated higher scores for the FertiQol relational domain (P=0.005) and lower scores for the social domain (P=0.010). Complementary-medicine users reported greater utilization of psychosocial support (P<0.001), and higher rates of physical activity (P=0.004) and consulting with dietitians (P=0.050). Conclusions: Users of complementary medicine reported increased relational and lower social QoL, increased use of psychosocial support, and favorable healthy-lifestyle habits. Actively inquiring about the lifestyle habits and QoL of patients experiencing infertility could be useful in identifying patients who could benefit from psychosocial interventions or lifestyle recommendations. (C) 2016 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据