Boyle, P. C., & Stanford, J. B. (2011). NaProTechnology (Natural Procreative Technology) - A Multifactorial Approach to the Chronic Problem of Infertility. Biomedicina (Sveikatos Mokslai/Health Sciences), 21, 61-68.
Boyle PC, Stanford JB. NaProTechnology (Natural Procreative Technology) - A Multifactorial Approach to the Chronic Problem of Infertility. Biomedicina (Sveikatos Mokslai/Health Sciences). 2011;21:61-68.
Boyle, P. C., and J. B. Stanford. "NaProTechnology (Natural Procreative Technology) - A Multifactorial Approach to the Chronic Problem of Infertility." Biomedicina (Sveikatos Mokslai/Health Sciences), vol. 21, 2011, pp. 61-68.
For EndNote, Zotero or Mendeley:
License
No open license is recorded for this paper. Reuse terms are set by the publisher.
Three couples with failed IVF each had a baby after NaProTechnology
Three couples with failed IVF each had a baby after NaProTechnology care, a 2011 case series from one Galway clinic. The women were 37 to 41 when they came. Each couple had several diagnoses, treated together. The authors argue that infertility is usually chronic and has multiple causes.
Key Findings
A woman aged 41 and a man aged 40, after 3 failed IUI and 2 failed IVF, conceived when she was 42 and had a healthy baby boy (Case A).
A couple trying for 7 years, with polycystic ovaries, 3 failed IVF cycles and 1 frozen transfer, conceived on the fifth treatment cycle and had a healthy baby boy (Case B).
A couple both aged 38, with 12 cycles of ovulation induction, 3 IUI and 3 failed IVF behind them, had a healthy baby boy and conceived again in 2010 (Case C).
The evaluation found five diagnoses in Case A, four in Case B and five in Case C, and treatment targeted all of them together.
Interpretation
The paper is a retrospective case series: three couples from one clinic, reported by the treating clinic with a university co-author. The series reports one live birth after this care in each of three couples with earlier failed IVF. The paper gives no count of couples treated, no comparison group, and no way to tell which treatment step mattered. The second pregnancy in Case C was still ongoing at publication. The authors call for larger prospective cohort studies of couples with similar characteristics.
RRM Context
The authors treat infertility as a sign of underlying conditions. That reading makes unexplained infertility an undiagnosed condition. NaProTechnology, the method used here, times tests from the woman's Creighton Model FertilityCare chart. The authors cite a 2005 Cochrane review: IVF's effectiveness against other options for unexplained infertility remains unproven. In each couple, IVF came before the added diagnoses were found.
Our editorial summary of this paper, not the article's abstract.
Abstract
Description
Infertility is usually a consequence of multiple chronic conditions rather than a single acute condition. We propose that it is erroneous to apply acute medical interventions to a condition that is chronic in nature.
Method
Retrospective analysis of 3 case studies which demonstrate the multifactorial and chronic nature of infertility that were previously managed unsuccessfully with acute intervention using IVF (in Vitro Fertilisation) or ART (Assisted Reproductive Technology).
Results
Demonstration of the multifactorial approach and 3 successful singleton live births using NPT (Natural Procreative Technology or NaProTechnology).
Conclusion
Infertility can be treated successfully with a multifactorial approach which takes into account the chronic nature of infertility and targets treatment to manage multiple factors responsible for the condition.
Discussion
Infertility is not a diagnosis but is often the expression of several underlying ill health conditions which if diagnosed and treated correctly will result in restoration of normal reproductive function. Physicians ought to consider broader diagnostic possibilities in their evaluation of infertile couples. A multifactorial treatment strategy for the chronic condition of infertility may be more effective than the widespread acute strategy employed by ART. Further study is required to investigate this possibility in more detail. Future studies looking at NPT and ART outcomes must be cohort studies comparing populations with similar patient characteristics.
Minjeur M et al., 2026·Journal of Restorative Reproductive Medicine·Free to read
Infertility is a clinical condition that is recognized by the symptom of an inability to conceive through sexual intercourse or to sustain a pregnancy, with that symptom indicating underlying male and/or female pathology.
This definition of infertility was developed through a structured, consensus-informed process involving broad stakeholder engagement. Initially, multiple definitions currently used by various medical professional organizations were reviewed, and a definition document was drafted and submitted to the Board of Directors of the International Institute for Restorative Reproductive Medicine (IIRRM). All IIRRM members were invited to provide feedback on the draft. Approximately 2,500 individuals and 44 organizations from 92 countries were then invited to review the proposed document, representing clinical, scientific, patient, policy, and advocacy perspectives. Submitted comments were reviewed thematically, with suggested revisions evaluated for clarity, clinical relevance, inclusiveness, and consistency with contemporary restorative reproductive medicine. Following this review, 3 substantive changes, 18 minor changes, and 15 citation corrections were incorporated into the final draft which resulted in a revised definition intended to better reflect the medical, social, and practical realities of modern infertility evaluation and care. Final approval by the IIRRM Board of Directors was unanimous.
Kahn LG et al., 2026·JAMA Network Open·Free full text on PubMed Central
Increasing numbers of children are conceived using infertility treatment; concerns remain about potential effects on child neurodevelopment. To evaluate whether infertility treatment is associated with child neurodevelopment and whether such an association may be attributable to underlying subfecundity. DESIGN, SETTING, This cohort study was conducted among mother-child dyads in the National Institutes of Health Environmental Influences on Child Health Outcomes (ECHO) Cohort, with infants conceived between 1998 and 2022. Associations of subfecundity and infertility treatment with neurodevelopmental outcomes were assessed among children ages 2 to 10 years. Data were analyzed from May 14, 2025, to March 31, 2026. Subfecundity was defined as prior consultation for, treatment of, or diagnosis of infertility for either partner; at least 2 prior miscarriages; or ever having had unprotected heterosexual intercourse for 12 months without conceiving. Infertility treatment was categorized as in vitro fertilization (IVF) or non-IVF treatment. Harmonized caregiver responses to the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire and the Child Behavior Checklist yielded continuous raw scores for externalizing and internalizing problems. The total raw Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS) score quantified autism-like symptoms. Caregivers reported physician diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Among 15 382 mother-infant dyads, there were 14 191 unique maternal participants (mean [SD] age at delivery, 30.9 [5.33] years; 8780 parous participants [57.1%]). ASD and ADHD were diagnosed in 876 offspring (7.6%) and 819 offspring (7.1%), respectively. In generalized linear models, subfecundity was associated with higher externalizing problem and SRS scores among all pregnancies (externalizing problems: b = 0.47 [95% CI, 0.14-0.81]; SRS score: b = 1.08 [95% CI, 0.01-2.14]) and when restricted to natural conceptions (externalizing problems: b = 0.45 [95% CI, 0.07-0.83]; SRS score: b = 1.12 [95% CI, -0.09 to 2.34]). Offspring of parents with subfecundity had higher odds of ASD (overall: odds ratio [OR], 1.27 [95% CI, 1.03-1.57]; natural conceptions: OR, 1.31 [95% CI, 1.04-1.64]). Children conceived via non-IVF treatment had higher odds of ADHD compared with those conceived via natural conception with subfecundity (OR, 1.77 [95% CI, 1.16-2.68]) or without subfecundity (OR, 1.54 [95% CI, 1.05-2.25]). There were no significant associations for IVF treatment. In this large US cohort study, subfecundity was associated with elevated scores for caregiver-reported symptoms of behavioral problems and higher odds of ASD diagnosis, independent of infertility treatment. Non-IVF treatment was associated with ADHD, warranting further research into specific indications for treatment that may increase risk of offspring neurodevelopmental problems.
Stanford JB et al., 2026·Frontiers in Reproductive Health·Free full text on PubMed Central
Background The total fertility rate (TFR) in most developed countries has been declining for decades. In the United States (U.S.), the total fertility rate has remained below replacement level since 2007. Subfertility affects at least 15% of women or couples over their reproductive lifespan and contributes to reduced TFR. Restorative reproductive medicine (RRM) is a medically based approach to subfertility care that can be delivered in primary care settings to increase live birth rates. Objective To estimate the theoretical impact of use of RRM among subfertile couples in the United States. Methods We conducted a simulation study. Model inputs included the number of women of reproductive age in the United States by 5-year age groups; current age-specific and total fertility rates; the proportion of women in each age group with subfertility; estimated spontaneous live birth rates among women with subfertility; and age-specific crude live birth rates with RRM treatment. We evaluated fifteen scenarios including sensitivity analyses: two different varying assumptions for spontaneous conception (25% vs. 50%), two levels of RRM utilization among subfertile women (20% vs. 50%), three different estimates of the number of subfertile women who would be potentially eligible for RRM treatment, and 4 different levels of effectiveness (live birth) from RRM treatment. Results The baseline TFR in the United States was 1.77 during 2015-2019, and 13.5% of women ages 20-44 were estimated to have subfertility. In a conservative scenario (50% spontaneous births; 20% RRM utilization; married women trying to conceive for at least 12 months, 20.7% RRM live births), the TFR increased to 1.79, representing a 1.0% relative increase (absolute +0.02). In an optimistic scenario (25% spontaneous births; 50% RRM utilization; all subfertile women), the TFR increased to 2.02, a 14.5% relative increase (absolute +0.26), approaching replacement-level fertility. Conclusion Simulation results suggest that expanding access to RRM within primary care settings could meaningfully increase the U.S. TFR, by reducing unresolved subfertility. Realizing this potential would require policy and health system changes to address workforce capacity, insurance coverage, and equitable access. These findings underscore the potential contribution of non-IVF fertility care pathways in addressing population-level fertility decline.
Sánchez-Méndez JI et al., 2025·Front Reprod Health·Free full text on PubMed Central
Assisted reproductive technologies (ART) are widely used to address infertility; however, they are costly, associated with medical risks, and often yield suboptimal clinical outcomes. Natural Procreative Technology, also known as NaProTechnology (NPT), provides a systematic and integrative approach to infertility by thoroughly identifying and treating underlying medical conditions to restore the couple's natural fertility potential. Despite its promise, real-world data on NPT effectiveness remain limited. The objective of this study is to evaluate the take-home baby rate in a large population of infertile couples treated with NPT and to synthesize findings from previously published studies. A retrospective cohort study was conducted involving 1,310 infertile couples treated at a specialized fertility clinic in Spain over a 5-year period. Participants presented with primary or secondary infertility or recurrent pregnancy loss. Clinical data, diagnoses, and outcomes were analyzed, including surgical interventions and treatment duration. The mean age of women and men was 35.0 (SD 4.4) and 36.9 (SD 5.3) years, respectively. Primary infertility was the most common subtype (73.5%), the median infertility duration was 24 months, and prior ART attempts were recorded in 27.5% of couples. Mean number of diagnoses per couple was 2.5 (SD 1.3). The crude take-home baby rate was 35.3% (N = 463). Independent predictors of successful take-home baby included female age, recurrent pregnancy loss as the reason for consultation, duration of infertility, and the presence of endometriosis, hormonal dysfunction, male factor, and endometrial disorders as diagnoses. Considering a median duration of NPT of 10.9 months (range 8.1-17.0), the adjusted cumulative take-home baby rate was 62.1%. Rates varied significantly by female age, with higher success observed in younger women: 83.7% at 18-30 years, 53.3% at 36-40 years, and 24.4% over 40 years. A sensitivity analysis was performed to assess the impact of dropout assumptions on cumulative pregnancy rates. Nearly one-third of patients underwent surgery, most commonly hysteroscopy and/or laparoscopy. In this cohort, NPT was associated with a notably high take-home baby rate in an infertile population with unfavorable prognostic factors, including advanced maternal age, prolonged duration of infertility, or previous failed attempts at conventional ART procedures.
Restorative Care and Assisted Reproduction · Outcome Comparisons
Dowbór-Dzwonka A et al., 2012·Zdr Publ·Free to read
Infertility is a significant and constantly increasing individual and social problem. It is estimated that at present it affects approx. 15 to 20 percent of couples. Inability to conceive a child elicits a range of unfavourable implications in the scope of emotional experiences, in the partner’s relationship and in a broader social perspective. Making a decision on undergoing diagnostics and infertility treatment is a difficult and often postponed moment for many couples. This is an expression of the escape model of dealing with a situation that threatens with a fall of self-esteem. However, if a couple reacts in a task-oriented way and participates in the diagnostic and therapeutic procedure, new doubts appear connected with the medical, psychological, social and ethical sphere. Infertility treatment sometimes prompts fear connected with the stripping of intimacy, loss of control over one’s body, possible complications and unsuccessful therapy. This article is an analysis of the medical and the other aspects of struggling with infertility with reference to two extremely different methods of solving this NaProTechnology as a process of assisting natural procreation and assisted reproductive techniques with a special consideration of in vitro fertilization.
Stanford JB et al., 2021·BMC Pregnancy Childbirth·Free full text on PubMed Central
Restorative reproductive medicine (RRM) seeks to identify and correct underlying causes and factors contributing to infertility and reproductive dysfunction. Many components of RRM are highly suitable for primary care practice. We studied the outcomes amongst couples who received restorative reproductive medicine treatment for infertility in a primary care setting. Two family physicians in Massachusetts trained in a systematic approach to RRM (natural procreative technology, or NaProTechnology) treated couples with infertility. We retrospectively reviewed the characteristics, diagnoses, treatments, and outcomes for all couples treated during the years 1989 to 2014. We compared pregnancy and live birth by clinical characteristics using Kaplan-Meier analysis. We employed the Fleming-Harrington weighted Renyi test or the logrank test to compare the cumulative proportion with pregnancy or with live birth. Among 370 couples beginning treatment for infertility, the mean age was 34.8 years, the mean prior time trying to conceive was 2.7 years, and 27% had a prior live birth. The mean number of diagnoses per couple was 4.9. Treatment components included fertility tracking with the Creighton Model FertilityCare System (80%); medications to enhance cervical mucus production (81%), to stimulate ovulation (62%), or to support the luteal phase (75%); and referral to female laparoscopy by a surgeon specializing in endometriosis (46%). The cumulative live birth rate at 2 years was 29% overall; this was significantly higher for women under age 35 (34%), and for women with body mass index < 25 (40%). There were 2 sets of twins and no higher-order multiple gestations. Of the 63 births with data available, 58 (92%) occurred at term. Family physicians can provide a RRM approach for infertility to identify underlying causes and promote healthy term live births. Younger women and women with body mass index < 25 are more likely to have a live birth.
Restorative Care and Assisted Reproduction · Outcome Comparisons
La progresiva medicalización de la infertilidad en las últimas tres décadas se corresponde con una creciente difusión de las Tecnologías de Reproducción Asistida (TRA), que han dejado en la sombra, casi por completo, otros enfoques más fisiológicos del tratamiento de la infertilidad, que tienen menos riesgos, son más económicos y, a la vez, igualmente efectivos. Este trabajo presenta un enfoque sistemático e integrado: la NaProTecnología (NPT), que tiene como objetivo optimizar las condiciones fisiológicas en cada ciclo menstrual, para permitir, de esta forma, una concepción por métodos naturales. Este método se postula como una mejor solución para el tratamiento de la infertilidad, desde un punto de vista que no sólo es más ético, sino que, además, es compatible con otros puntos de vistas religiosos, médicos, sociales, legales y ambientales. Los gobiernos deberían promover y financiar la NPT y, al mismo tiempo, las sociedades médicas y científicas deberían diseñar estudios para comparar de una manera justa la tasa de éxito, los costos y las complicaciones de la NPT en contraposición al método TRA tradicional.
Restorative Reproductive Medicine › NaProTechnology › Protocols and Framework · Assisted Reproduction › Outcomes and Effectiveness › Live Birth Rates
Phil C Boyle, Joseph B Stanford
Philip Boyle, Phillip Boyle, P Boyle, Joe Stanford, Joey Stanford, J Stanford
Boyle et al. 2011, Boyle 2011
Cite this article
Boyle, P. C., & Stanford, J. B. (2011). NaProTechnology (Natural Procreative Technology) - A Multifactorial Approach to the Chronic Problem of Infertility. Biomedicina (Sveikatos Mokslai/Health Sciences), 21, 61-68.
Boyle PC, Stanford JB. NaProTechnology (Natural Procreative Technology) - A Multifactorial Approach to the Chronic Problem of Infertility. Biomedicina (Sveikatos Mokslai/Health Sciences). 2011;21:61-68.
Boyle, P. C., and J. B. Stanford. "NaProTechnology (Natural Procreative Technology) - A Multifactorial Approach to the Chronic Problem of Infertility." Biomedicina (Sveikatos Mokslai/Health Sciences), vol. 21, 2011, pp. 61-68.