5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      THE IMPACT OF COVID-19 ON FERTILITY CARE: AN EVALUATION OF SOCIETY FOR ASSISTED REPRODUCTION TECHNOLOGY (SART) MEMBER CLINICS’ WEBSITES

      abstract
      , M.D., M.S. 1 , , M.P.H. 2 , , M.D. 3 , , Ph.D. 4 , , M.D. 5
      Fertility and Sterility
      Published by Elsevier Inc.

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective To evaluate the available COVID-19 content in regard to fertility care on the websites of Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology (SART) member clinics. Design Cross-sectional study. Materials and Methods From March 17 to March 30, 2020, following the release of the first American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) COVID-19 recommendations, SART member clinics’ websites were examined. The presence of information on COVID-19 and pregnancy implications, acknowledgement of and compliance with ASRM recommendations, description of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) risk mitigation strategies and local health department guidelines, as well as advertisement of telehealth and available mental health resources were queried. Websites were categorized by practice size (small: <500 vs. large: ≥500 cycles/year), type (academic vs. private) and degree of statewide COVID-19 burden based on CDC data (low: 0-1000; high: ≥1000 diagnosed cases). Group differences were evaluated using χ2. Results Larger clinics, compared to smaller, were more likely to report COVID-19 information, acknowledge and comply with ASRM recommendations, mention CDC risk mitigation strategies and local health department guidelines, discuss pregnancy implications and advertise telehealth [88% (130/148) vs. 64% (146/227); 49% (72/148) vs. 32% (72/227); 52% (77/148) vs. 34% (75/227); 76% (112/148) vs. 53% (120/227); 50% (74/148) vs. 31% (71/227); 36% (53/148) vs. 21% (48/227) and 38% (101/148) vs. 29% (119/227), respectively, P<0.05, all values]. Academic clinics, compared to private, were more likely to report COVID-19 information and report CDC risk mitigation strategies [87% (77/89) vs. 70% (199/286); 76% (68/89) vs. 57% (164/286), respectively, P<0.05, all values]. Private clinics were more likely to acknowledge and quote ≥3/5 ASRM key recommendations but tended to devise individualized guidelines [44% (126/286) vs. 20% (18/89); 28% (80/286) vs. 12% (11/89) and 34% (97/286) vs. 4% (4/89), respectively, P<0.05, all values]. Private clinics were also more likely to advertise telehealth and discuss pregnancy implications [63% (179/286) vs. 46% (41/89) and 37% (106/286) vs. 20% (18/89), respectively, P<0.05, all values]. Only 35/375 websites offered mental health resources. Degree of statewide COVID-19 burden did not appear to impact the information available on clinic websites. Conclusions Clinic size and type of practice, rather than COVID-19 burden, influenced websites use for patient education and care during the pandemic. Telehealth advertisement as well as adherence to regulatory agencies' and societal recommendations were more common in larger clinics. Private clinics more frequently devised individualized patient care guidelines, addressed common concerns about the effect of COVID-19 on pregnancy, and made telehealth more readily accessible. The exclusion of such information on clinic websites may be a missed opportunity to support and educate patients about fertility treatment during a uniquely vulnerable time.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Journal
          Fertil Steril
          Fertil Steril
          Fertility and Sterility
          Published by Elsevier Inc.
          0015-0282
          1556-5653
          12 October 2020
          September 2020
          12 October 2020
          : 114
          : 3
          : e179
          Affiliations
          [1 ]The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, DC
          [2 ]SUNY Downstate Health Sciences University, Brooklyn, NY
          [3 ]Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA
          [4 ]Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Chicago, IL
          [5 ]UCLA, Los Angeles, CA
          Article
          S0015-0282(20)31264-4
          10.1016/j.fertnstert.2020.08.510
          7548600
          804ceb2c-fa05-4617-9a07-aaf56636a3a2
          Copyright © 2020 Published by Elsevier Inc.

          Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

          History
          Categories
          Article

          Obstetrics & Gynecology
          Obstetrics & Gynecology

          Comments

          Comment on this article