Ethics and IVF add-ons: We need to talk about it.

IF 1.9
Daniela Paes de Almeida Ferreira Braga, Amanda Souza Setti, Edson Borges
{"title":"Ethics and IVF add-ons: We need to talk about it.","authors":"Daniela Paes de Almeida Ferreira Braga,&nbsp;Amanda Souza Setti,&nbsp;Edson Borges","doi":"10.5935/1518-0557.20220030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In vitro fertilization (IVF) 'add-ons' are adjunct treatments used in addition to standard IVF protocols, in an attempt to improve success rates. However, the benefits for add-ons are often not supported by high-quality evidence. Nevertheless, many infertile patients are willing to try anything that might help them to improve their chances of having a baby. Therefore, the use of add-ons has been widespread and has led to extensive debate and discussion. The goal of this manuscript was to discuss the ethics underling the use of adjunct therapies in clinical practice before their safety has been thoroughly ascertained. IVF patients are routinely offered and charged for a wide range of adjunct treatments that they are told may improve their chance of a live birth, despite there being no clinical evidence supporting such efficacy. Add-on treatments are well accepted by most infertile patients, especially those who have already started their IVF treatments. A particular concern is that many clinics around the world are advertising and offering clinical adjuncts to infertile couples undergoing IVF, however, information on add-ons is often inaccurate. Data concerning the lack of scientific evidence supporting add-on efficacy and whether an add-on may cause unanticipated harm or worsen treatment outcomes is not available on most websites. IVF patients are a vulnerable population, thus there is a need for transparency about interventions for IVF, including uncertainties and risks, to support patient decision-making regarding the use of certain adjunctive therapies. Such information can be provided by clear guidelines and effective regulation.</p>","PeriodicalId":520656,"journal":{"name":"JBRA assisted reproduction","volume":" ","pages":"371-373"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9355445/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JBRA assisted reproduction","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5935/1518-0557.20220030","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

In vitro fertilization (IVF) 'add-ons' are adjunct treatments used in addition to standard IVF protocols, in an attempt to improve success rates. However, the benefits for add-ons are often not supported by high-quality evidence. Nevertheless, many infertile patients are willing to try anything that might help them to improve their chances of having a baby. Therefore, the use of add-ons has been widespread and has led to extensive debate and discussion. The goal of this manuscript was to discuss the ethics underling the use of adjunct therapies in clinical practice before their safety has been thoroughly ascertained. IVF patients are routinely offered and charged for a wide range of adjunct treatments that they are told may improve their chance of a live birth, despite there being no clinical evidence supporting such efficacy. Add-on treatments are well accepted by most infertile patients, especially those who have already started their IVF treatments. A particular concern is that many clinics around the world are advertising and offering clinical adjuncts to infertile couples undergoing IVF, however, information on add-ons is often inaccurate. Data concerning the lack of scientific evidence supporting add-on efficacy and whether an add-on may cause unanticipated harm or worsen treatment outcomes is not available on most websites. IVF patients are a vulnerable population, thus there is a need for transparency about interventions for IVF, including uncertainties and risks, to support patient decision-making regarding the use of certain adjunctive therapies. Such information can be provided by clear guidelines and effective regulation.

Abstract Image

伦理和体外受精附加:我们需要讨论这个问题。
体外受精(IVF)“附加治疗”是在标准试管婴儿方案之外使用的辅助治疗,旨在提高成功率。然而,附加组件的好处往往没有高质量的证据支持。然而,许多不孕患者愿意尝试任何可能帮助他们提高生育机会的方法。因此,外接程序的使用已经广泛,并导致了广泛的辩论和讨论。这篇文章的目的是讨论在临床实践中使用辅助疗法的伦理问题,然后再彻底确定其安全性。尽管没有临床证据支持这种疗效,但试管婴儿患者通常会被提供并收费各种辅助治疗,他们被告知这些治疗可能会提高他们活产的机会。附加治疗被大多数不孕症患者所接受,特别是那些已经开始体外受精治疗的患者。一个特别令人担忧的问题是,世界各地的许多诊所都在为接受体外受精的不孕夫妇做广告,并提供临床辅助治疗,然而,有关附加治疗的信息往往是不准确的。大多数网站上没有关于缺乏科学证据支持附加疗效以及附加是否会造成意外伤害或恶化治疗结果的数据。体外受精患者是弱势群体,因此需要对体外受精干预措施(包括不确定性和风险)进行透明,以支持患者在使用某些辅助治疗时做出决策。这种信息可以通过明确的指导方针和有效的管理来提供。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信