MEDICAL AND SOCIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF WOMEN OF REPRODUCTIVE AGE DURING IN VITRO FERTILIZATION PROGRAMS

Authors:

Abstract:

The article presents a study of the medical and social characteristics of women of reproductive age undergoing infertility treatment by in vitro fertilization. 256 women from the main group and 74 women with physiological pregnancy (control) were included. A comprehensive analysis of demographic, socio-economic, clinical, anamnestic, and behavioral factors affecting reproductive function and the effectiveness of Assisted Reproductive Technology programs has been conducted. The dominance of urban living, mainly an average level of education, and a variety of social statuses among the patients were revealed. In the main group, there was a high prevalence of gynecological diseases and primary infertility (79.7 %), as well as a significant proportion of factors affecting reproductive function. The results emphasize the need for an integrated, individualized approach to women's management when planning and conducting In Vitro Fertilization programs, taking into account both clinical and medico-social characteristics.

Keywords:

women infertility age reproductive health in vitro fertilization

References:

1. Aslam S. Sociodemographic profile of females with in vitro fertilization failure. Pioneer Journal of Biostatistics and Medical Research. 2024;2(4):34–40. https://doi.org/10.61171/v02.04.87.
2. Dyer SJ, Patel M. The economic impact of infertility on women and families: a global perspective. Facts, Views & Vision in ObGyn. 2023;15(1):13–22.
3. Elyasi F, Parkoohi PI, Naseri M, Gelekolaee KS, Hamedi M, Peyvandi S, et al. Relationship between coping/attachment styles and infertility-specific distress in Iranian infertile individuals: a cross-sectional study. International Journal of Reproductive Biomedicine. 2021;19(4):347–360. https://doi.org/10.18502/ijrm.v19i4.9061.
4. Farquhar CM, Bhattacharya S, Repping S, Mastenbroek S, Kamath MS, Marjoribanks J, et al. Female subfertility. Nature Reviews Disease Primers. 2019;5(1):7. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41572-018-0058-8.
5. Fauque P, De Mouzon J, Devaux A, Epelboin S, Gervoise-Boyer MJ, Levy R, et al. Reproductive technologies, female infertility, and the risk of imprinting-related disorders. Clinical Epigenetics. 2020;12(1):191. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13148-020-00986-3.
6. Inhorn MC, Patrizio P. Infertility around the globe: new thinking on gender, reproductive technologies and global movements in the 21st century. Human Reproduction Update. 2015;21(4):411–426. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmv016.
7. Ranji U, Diep K, Frederiksen B, Gomez I, Salganicoff A. Access to fertility care: findings from the 2024 KFF women’s health survey. KFF Women’s Health Policy Issue Brief. 2024 Oct 21.
8. Sadecki E, Weaver A, Zhao Y, Stewart EA, Ainsworth AJ. Fertility trends and comparisons in a historical cohort of US women with primary infertility. Reproductive Health. 2022;19(1):13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12978-021-01313-6.
9. Silva SG, Bertoldi AD, da Silveira MF, Domingues MR, Evenson KR, Dos Santos IS. Assisted reproductive technology: prevalence and associated factors in Southern Brazil. Revista de Saúde Pública. 2019;53:13. https://doi.org/10.11606/S1518-8787.2019053000737.
10. Snow M, Vranich T.M., Perin J., Trent M. Estimates of infertility in the United States: 1995-2019. Fertil. Steril. 2022;118(3):560-567. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2022.05.018.
11. Sohbati F, Hasanpoor Azghady SB, Jafarabadi M, Amiri-Farahani L, Mohebbi M. Psychological well-being of infertile women and its relationship with demographic factors and fertility history: a cross-sectional study.BMC Women’s Health. 2021;21(1):22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-020-01167-3.

Publication:

«World of Medicine and Biology» Vol. 21 No. 94 (2025) , с. 17-21
УДК 618.177-089.888.11

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.26724/2079-8334-2025-4-94-17-21