Should home-based ovulation predictor kits be offered as an additional approach for fertility management for women and couples desiring pregnancy? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
fertility management
infertility
ovulation predictor kits
systematic review
Journal
BMJ global health
ISSN: 2059-7908
Titre abrégé: BMJ Glob Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101685275
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2019
2019
Historique:
received:
08
01
2019
revised:
20
03
2019
accepted:
26
03
2019
entrez:
30
5
2019
pubmed:
30
5
2019
medline:
30
5
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To inform the WHO Guideline on self-care interventions, we conducted a systematic review of the impact of ovulation predictor kits (OPKs) on time-to-pregnancy, pregnancy, live birth, stress/anxiety, social harms/adverse events and values/preferences. Included studies had to compare women desiring pregnancy who managed their fertility with and without OPKs, measure an outcome of interest and be published in a peer-reviewed journal. We searched for studies on PubMed, CINAHL, LILACS and EMBASE through November 2018. We assessed risk of bias assessed using the Cochrane tool for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and the Evidence Project tool for observational studies, and conducted meta-analysis using random effects models to generate pooled estimates of relative risk (RR). Four studies (three RCTs and one observational study) including 1487 participants, all in high-income countries, were included. Quality of evidence was low. Two RCTs found no difference in time-to-pregnancy. All studies reported pregnancy rate, with mixed results: one RCT from the 1990s among couples with unexplained or male-factor infertility found no difference in clinical pregnancy rate (RR: 1.09, 95% CI 0.51 to 2.32); two more recent RCTs found higher self-reported pregnancy rates among OPK users (pooled RR: 1.40, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.80). A small observational study found higher rates of pregnancy with lab testing versus OPKs among women using donor insemination services. One RCT found no increase in stress/anxiety after two menstrual cycles using OPKs, besides a decline in positive affect. No studies measured live birth or social harms/adverse events. Six studies presented end-users' values/preferences, with almost all women reporting feeling satisfied, comfortable and confident using OPKs. A small evidence base, from high-income countries and with high risk of bias, suggests that home-based use of OPKs may improve fertility management when attempting to become pregnant with no meaningful increase in stress/anxiety and with high user acceptability. PROSPERO registration number CRD42019119402.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31139458
doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2019-001403
pii: bmjgh-2019-001403
pmc: PMC6509595
doi:
Types de publication
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Pagination
e001403Subventions
Organisme : World Health Organization
ID : 001
Pays : International
Organisme : NIMH NIH HHS
ID : R01 MH090173
Pays : United States
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: None declared.
Références
Fertil Steril. 2003 Mar;79(3):577-84
pubmed: 12620443
Hum Reprod. 2003 Sep;18(9):1959-66
pubmed: 12923157
Ann Pharmacother. 2004 Feb;38(2):325-31
pubmed: 14742773
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 1992 May;32(2):158-60
pubmed: 1520203
Contraception. 2006 Jan;73(1):65-71
pubmed: 16371298
Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2006 Nov;20 Suppl 1:51-9
pubmed: 17061974
Fertil Steril. 2007 Feb;87(2):329-34
pubmed: 17074329
PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000097
pubmed: 19621072
Fertil Steril. 2009 Nov;92(5):1520-4
pubmed: 19828144
Fertil Steril. 1991 Jun;55(6):1137-43
pubmed: 2037107
Hum Reprod. 2013 Jan;28(1):138-51
pubmed: 23081872
PLoS Med. 2012;9(12):e1001356
pubmed: 23271957
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Mar 17;(3):CD011345
pubmed: 25775926
Antivir Ther. 2015;20(6):613-21
pubmed: 25849113
Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2015 Apr 26;13:37
pubmed: 25928197
J Midwifery Womens Health. 2015 Sep-Oct;60(5):604-9
pubmed: 26461194
Reprod Health. 2015 Dec 21;12:116
pubmed: 26689590
Fertil Steril. 2016 Jun;105(6):1566-1574.e1
pubmed: 26902860
Lancet. 1985 Sep 14;2(8455):596-8
pubmed: 2863605
Fertil Steril. 2017 Sep;108(3):393-406
pubmed: 28760517
Bioeng Transl Med. 2017 May 16;2(3):238-246
pubmed: 29313033
J Hum Reprod Sci. 2017 Oct-Dec;10(4):293-296
pubmed: 29430157
Res Synth Methods. 2018 Jul 14;:null
pubmed: 30006970
Syst Rev. 2019 Jan 3;8(1):3
pubmed: 30606262
Hum Reprod. 1996 Aug;11(8):1674-7
pubmed: 8921115