e-Therapy to reduce emotional distress in women undergoing assisted reproductive technology (ART): a feasibility randomized controlled trial.

Is it feasible to evaluate a personalized e-therapy program (Internet based) for women during fertility treatment aimed to reduce the chance of having clinically relevant symptoms of anxiety and/or depression after unsuccessful assisted reproductive technology (ART) treatment within a randomized controlled trial (RCT)? The evaluation of a personalized e-therapy program is feasible, reflected by good acceptability and integration within current guidelines, but adjustments to the e-therapy program and study design of the RCT have to be made to enhance demand, practicality and efficacy. Internet-based interventions are promising in reducing psychological distress, especially when treatment is personalized to specific risk profiles of patients. However in fertility care, the beneficial effects of personalized e-therapy on psychological distress and its implementation in daily clinical care still have to be evaluated. To evaluate the feasibility of a personalized e-therapy program, we conducted a two-arm, parallel group, single-blind feasibility randomized controlled trial with a 1:1 allocation. Feasibility was assessed in terms of demand, acceptability, practicality, implementation, integration and limited efficacy. Women were included between 1 February 2011 and 1 June 2013. Women in the control group received care as usual, whereas women in the intervention group received in addition to their usual care access to a personalized e-therapy program. Women were monitored until 3 months after the start of their first ART cycle. In a university hospital in the Netherlands women who were screened as at risk for emotional adjustment problems and intended to start their first ART cycle were invited, and of them 120 were randomized. Of these women, 48% in the intervention group were compliant to the intervention. Outcome measures associated with the feasibility to analyse this e-therapy program within an RCT were assessed. It is feasible to evaluate a personalized e-therapy program within an RCT. The acceptability was good, as was the integration within current clinical guidelines and care. However, the demand reflected by a participation rate of 44% was low, since most women declined participation because they felt no need for support at that moment. The practicality of the intervention was moderate illustrated by a relatively high dropout rate (30%) due to practical concerns. The intervention was effective, shown by a reduction in the percentage women having clinically relevant symptoms of anxiety and/or depression in the compliant intervention group compared with the control group 3 months after the first ART cycle; risk difference of 24% (95% CI: 2-46%; ITALIC! P = 0.03). The large non-participation rate (56%) needs further evaluation. This also could have influenced results on limited efficacy. Barriers for participation could be assessed more in-depth. Moreover, ∼30% dropped out. This percentage is comparable with other e-health studies. Finally, this is a single-centre study. Generalizability could be enlarged by a multi-centre approach. In clinical fertility care, personalizing an e-therapy program to the patients' risk profile is promising and feasible. However, in future studies, we recommend modification of the study protocol by for example offering the intervention to the preferred moment in the treatment process. Moreover, adjustment of the study protocol tailored to the found barriers and facilitators is needed. When performing a multi-centre consecutive RCT to assess the effectiveness of personalized e-therapy in fertility care, the findings of this study, for example concerning the preferred timing or reasons for non-participation, could be helpful. NutsOhra (Study Number 0702-94) funded this study with an unrestricted grant. There were no competing interests. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT 01283607. 21 January 2011. February, 2011.

van Dongen AJ ，Nelen WL ，IntHout J ，Kremer JA ，Verhaak CM ... -  《-》

The effect of expressive writing intervention for infertile couples: a randomized controlled trial.

Is expressive writing intervention (EWI) efficacious in reducing distress and improving pregnancy rates for couples going through ART treatment? Compared to controls, EWI statistically significantly reduced depressive symptoms but not anxiety and infertility-related distress. ART treatment is considered stressful. So far, various psychological interventions have been tested for their potential in reducing infertility-related distress and the results are generally positive. It remains unclear whether EWI, a brief and potentially cost-effective intervention, could be advantageous. Between November 2010 and July 2012, a total of 295 participants (163 women, 132 men) were randomly allocated to EWI or a neutral writing control group. Participants were couples undergoing IVF/ICSI treatment. Single women and couples with Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis or acute change of procedure from insemination to IVF, were excluded. EWI participants participated in three 20-min home-based writing exercises focusing on emotional disclosure in relation to infertility/fertility treatment (two sessions) and benefit finding (one session). Controls wrote non-emotionally in three 20-min sessions about their daily activities. The participants completed questionnaires at the beginning of treatment (t1), prior to the pregnancy test (t2), and 3 months later (t3). In total, 26.8% (79/295) were lost to follow-up. Mixed linear models were chosen to compare the two groups over time for psychological outcomes (depression, anxiety and infertility-related distress), and a Chi2 test was employed in order to examine group differences in pregnancy rates MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: One hundred and fifty-three participants received EWI (women = 83; men = 70) and 142 participants were allocated to the neutral writing control group (women = 83; men = 62). Both women and partners in the EWI group exhibited greater reductions in depressive symptoms compared with controls (P = 0.049; [CI 95%: -0.04; -0.01] Cohen's d = 0.27). The effect of EWI on anxiety did not reach statistical significance. Overall infertility-related distress increased marginally for the partners in the EWI group compared to the partners in the control group (P = 0.06; Cohen's d = 0.17). However, in relation to the personal subdomain, the increase was statistically significant (P = 0.01; Cohen's d = 0.24). EWI had no statistically significant effect on pregnancy rates with 42/83 (50.6%) achieving pregnancy in the EWI group compared with 40/80 (49.4%) in the control group (RR = 0.99 [CI 95% = 0.725, 1.341]; P = 0.94). The results for depressive symptoms corresponded to a small effect size and the remaining results failed to reach statistical significance. This could be due to sample characteristics leading to a possible floor-effect, as we did not exclude participants with low levels of emotional distress at baseline. Furthermore, men showed increased infertility-related distress over time. EWI is a potentially cost-effective and easy to implement home-based intervention, and even small effects may be relevant. When faced with infertility, EWI could thus be a relevant tool for alleviating depressive symptoms by allowing the expression of feelings about infertility that may be perceived as socially unacceptable. However, the implications do not seem to be applicable for men, who presented with increased infertility-related distress over time. The present study was supported by research grants from Merck Sharpe and Dohme and The Danish Agency for Science Technology and Innovation as part of a publicly funded PhD. The funding bodies had no influence on the data collection, analysis or conclusions of the study. None of the authors have any conflicts of interest to declare. Clinicaltrials.gov, trial no. NCT01187095. 7th September 2010 DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLMENT: 23rd November 2010.

Frederiksen Y ，O'Toole MS ，Mehlsen MY ，Hauge B ，Elbaek HO ，Zachariae R ，Ingerslev HJ ... -  《-》

The clinical effectiveness of the Mind/Body Program for Infertility on wellbeing and assisted reproduction outcomes: a randomized controlled trial in search for active ingredients.

Does the Mind/Body Program for Infertility (MBPI) perform better, due to certain distinctive elements, than a partly matched support group in improving the wellbeing and medically assisted reproduction (MAR) outcomes of women with elevated distress levels in a clinical setting? While robust enhancements occurred in the wellbeing overall, the cognitive behavioural and formalized stress management elements of the MBPI allowed a significantly stronger improvement in trait anxiety, but not in other mental health and MAR outcomes, compared with a support group. Mind-body psychological programmes adjacent to MAR have been found to improve women's mental states and possibly increase chances of pregnancy. However, not enough is known about the programme's effectiveness among patients with elevated distress levels in routine clinical settings, nor is it clear which of its particular ingredients are specifically effective. A pre-post design, single-centre, randomized controlled trial was performed between December 2019 and October 2022 (start and end of recruitment, respectively). The sample size (n = 168) was calculated to detect superiority of the MBPI in improving fertility-related quality of life. Randomization was computer-based, with random numbers concealing identities of patients until after allocation. The trial was conducted at a large university teaching hospital. A total of 168 patients were randomly assigned to the mind-body (MBPI) group (n = 84) and the fertility support (FS) control group (n = 84). Patients received a 10-week, 135-min/week group intervention, with the FS group following the same format as the MBPI group, but with a less restricted and systematic content, and without the presumed effective factors. The number of patients analysed was n = 74 (MBPI) and n = 68 (FS) for post-intervention psychological outcomes, and n = 54 (MBPI) and n = 56 (FS) for pregnancy outcomes at a 30-month follow-up. Significant improvements occurred in both groups in all psychological domains (adjusted P < 0.001), except for treatment-related quality of life. Linear mixed-model regression analysis did not reveal significantly greater pre-post improvements in the MBPI group than in the FS group in fertility-related quality of life (difference in differences (DD) = 4.11 [0.42, 7.80], d = 0.32, adjusted P = 0.124), treatment-related quality of life (DD = -3.08 [-7.72, 1.55], d = -0.20, adjusted P = 0.582), infertility-specific stress (DD = -2.54 [-4.68, 0.41], d = -0.36, adjusted P = 0.105), depression (DD = -1.16 [3.61, 1.29], d = -0.13, adjusted P = 0.708), and general stress (DD = -0.62 [-1.91, 0.68], d = -0.13, adjusted P = 0.708), but it did show a significantly larger improvement in trait anxiety (DD = -3.60 [-6.16, -1.04], d = -0.32, adjusted P = 0.042). Logistic regression showed no group effect on MAR pregnancies, spontaneous pregnancies, or live births. The follow-up only covered MAR-related medical outcomes and no psychological variables, and their rates were not equal in the two groups. Biological factors other than age, aetiology, and duration of infertility may have confounded the study results. Loss to follow-up was between 5% and 10%, which may have led to some bias. The psychologically and medically heterogeneous sample, the normal clinical setting and the low attrition rate all raise the external validity and generalizability of our study. The MBPI works not only in controlled conditions, but also in routine MAR practice, where it can be introduced as a cost-effective, low-intensity psychological intervention, within the framework of stepped care. More studies are needed to further identify its active ingredients. The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. The authors have no conflict of interest to disclose. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04151485. 5 November 2019. 15 December 2019.

Szigeti F J ，Kazinczi C ，Szabó G ，Sipos M ，Ujma PP ，Purebl G ... -  《-》

Feasibility randomized controlled trial of a self-guided online intervention to promote psychosocial adjustment to unmet parenthood goals.

Is it feasible to implement and evaluate an online self-guided psychosocial intervention for people with an unmet parenthood goal (UPG), aimed to improve well-being, in an online randomized controlled trial (RCT)? The evaluation of an online bilingual self-guided psychosocial intervention for people with a UPG is feasible, reflected by high demand, good acceptability, good adaptation and promise of efficacy, but minor adjustments to the intervention and study design of the RCT should be made to enhance practicality. Self-identifying as having a UPG, defined as being unable to have children or as many as desired, is associated with impaired well-being and mental health. Practice guidelines and regulatory bodies have highlighted the need to address the lack of evidence-based support for this population. It is unknown if MyJourney (www.myjourney.pt), the first online self-guided intervention for people with UPGs, can be implemented and evaluated in an RCT. To evaluate the feasibility of MyJourney, we conducted a registered, two-arm, parallel group, non-blinded feasibility RCT, with a 1:1 computer-generated randomized allocation and embedded qualitative process evaluation. Participants were included between November 2020 and March 2021. Assessments were made before randomization (T1), 10 weeks (T2) and 6 months after (T3, intervention group only). Participants allocated to the intervention group received an email to access MyJourney immediately after randomization. Participants in the waitlist control group were given access to MyJourney after completing the 10-week assessment (T2). Participants were recruited via social media advertising of MyJourney and its feasibility study. People who self-identified as having a UPG could click on a link to participate, and of these 235 were randomized. Outcome measures related to demand, acceptability, implementation, practicality, adaptation and limited efficacy were assessed via online surveys. The primary outcome in limited efficacy testing was hedonic well-being, measured with the World Health Organisation Wellbeing Index (WHO-5). Participation and retention rates were 58.3%, 31.7% (T2) and 45.2% (T3, intervention group only), respectively. Of participants invited to register with MyJourney, 91 (76.5%) set up an account, 51 (47.2%) completed the first Step of MyJourney, 12 (11.1%) completed six Steps (sufficient dose) and 6 (5.6%) completed all Steps within the 10-week recommended period. Acceptability ranged from 2.79 (successful at supporting) to 4.42 (easy to understand) on a 1 (not at all) to 5 (extremely acceptable) scale. Average time to complete sufficient dose was 15.6 h (SD = 18.15) and to complete all Steps was 12.4 h (SD = 18.15), with no differences found for participants using MyJourney in Portuguese and English. Modified intention-to-treat analysis showed a moderate increase in well-being from T1 to T2 in the intervention group (ηp2 = 0.156, mean difference (MD) = 9.300 (2.285, 16.315)) and no changes in the control group (ηp2 = 0.000, MD = 0.047 (-3.265, 3.358)). Participants in the process evaluation reported MyJourney was needed and answered their needs for support (reflecting high demand and acceptability), the recommended period to engage with MyJourney was short, and their engagement was influenced by multiple factors, including personal (e.g. lack of time) and MyJourney related (e.g. reminders). Participants were mostly white, well-educated, employed, childless women. Non-blinded allocation, use of self-reported questionnaire assessments and high attrition in the intervention group could have triggered bias favourable to positive evaluations of MyJourney and resulted in low power to detect T2 to T3 changes in limited efficacy outcomes. MyJourney can proceed to efficacy testing, but future work should eliminate barriers for engagement and explore strategies to maximize adherence. Entities wanting to support people with UPGs now have a freely accessible and promising resource that can be further tested and evaluated in different settings. MyJourney's development was funded by the charity Portuguese Fertility Association, Cardiff University and University of Coimbra (CINEICC). Dr S.G. reports consultancy fees from Ferring Pharmaceuticals A/S, speaker fees from Access Fertility, SONA-Pharm LLC, Meridiano Congress International and Gedeon Richter and grants from Merck Serono Ltd. Bethan Rowbottom holds a PhD scholarship funded by the School of Psychology, Cardiff University. The other authors have no conflicts of interest. Clinical Trials.gov NCT04850482.

Rowbottom B ，Galhardo A ，Donovan E ，Gameiro S ... -  《-》

Effectiveness of two guided self-administered interventions for psychological distress among women with infertility: a three-armed, randomized controlled trial.

What is the effect of two guided self-administered interventions on psychological distress in women undergoing IVF or ICSI? A brief mindfulness intervention significantly reduced depression and improved sleep quality, while the gratitude journal intervention showed no significant effect on any outcome variables. Mindfulness and gratitude journal interventions have been found to be beneficial in reducing negative affect and improving well-being. However, there are very few mental health professionals who implement such interventions in low- and middle-income countries. Therefore, two guided self-administered interventions for women with infertility were designed to help them cope with their psychological distress. A three-armed, randomized controlled trial was designed to evaluate the mindfulness and gratitude journal interventions for women undergoing IVF/ICSI. Between May 2016 and November 2017, at the reproductive center in a public hospital, 234 women were randomly assigned to the brief mindfulness group (BMG, n = 78), gratitude journal group (GJG, n = 78) or control group (CG, n = 78). The inclusion criteria were being a woman undergoing her first cycle of IVF, having at least junior middle school education and having no biological or adopted children. Female infertility patients (n = 346) were approached, and 112 did not meet the inclusion criteria. All three randomized groups completed questionnaires on the day of down-regulation (T1), the day before embryo(s) transfer (T2), and 3 days before the pregnancy test (T3). The BMG completed four sessions and listened to a 20-minute audio daily, including guided mindfulness breathing and body scan. The GJG completed four sessions and wrote three gratitude journals daily. The CG received routine care. A generalized estimating equation was used in an intention-to-treat analysis. The primary outcome was depression. Secondary outcomes were anxiety, sleep quality, infertility-related stress, mindfulness and gratitude. Participants of the BMG showed decreased depression (mean difference (MD) = -1.69, [-3.01, -0.37], d = 0.44) and improved sleep quality (MD = -1.24, [-1.95, -0.39], d = 0.43) compared to the CG, but the effect was not significant for anxiety, Fertility Problem Inventory totals, mindfulness, gratitude scores or pregnancy rates. The BMG showed a significant reduction in depression and improvement in sleep quality between T1 and T2, a continuous significant reduction between T1 and T3 and no reduction between T2 and T3. There were no significant effects on any of the variables for the GJG. The inclusion criteria may result in bias because some participants with low education were excluded and only women with infertility were included. A low compliance rate occurred in the gratitude journals group. Moreover, men were not included in this study. Further research should consider including spouses of the target population. The brief mindfulness intervention was beneficial in decreasing depression and improving sleep quality. Implementation of guided self-administered mindfulness could make the psychological counseling service more accessible for patients with infertility in resource-poor settings. The efficiency and feasibility of the gratitude journal intervention needs to be investigated further. This study was funded by the National Social Science Foundation (17BSH054). The authors have no conflicts of interest. ChiCTR-IOR-16008452. 9 May 2016. 15 May 2016.

Bai CF ，Cui NX ，Xu X ，Mi GL ，Sun JW ，Shao D ，Li J ，Jiang YZ ，Yang QQ ，Zhang X ，Cao FL ... -  《-》