The inability to conceive children is experienced as a stressful situation by individuals and couples all around the world. The consequences of infertility are manifold and can include societal repercussions and personal suffering. Advances in assisted reproductive technologies, such as IVF, can offer hope to many couples where treatment is available, although barriers exist in terms of medical coverage and affordability. The medicalization of infertility has unwittingly led to a disregard for the emotional responses that couples experience, which include distress, loss of control, stigmatization, and a disruption in the developmental trajectory of adulthood. Evidence is emerging of an association between stress of fertility treatment and patient drop-out and pregnancy rates. Fortunately, psychological interventions, especially those emphasizing stress management and coping-skills training, have been shown to have beneficial effects for infertility patients. Further research is needed to understand the association between distress and fertility outcome, as well as effective psychosocial interventions.
PMID 17241818 17241818 DOI 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2006.12.003 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2006.12.003 Cousineau et al. 2007, Cousineau 2007
Cite this article
Cousineau TM, & Domar AD (2007). Psychological impact of infertility. Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 21(2), 293-308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2006.12.003
Cousineau TM, Domar AD. Psychological impact of infertility. Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology. 2007;21(2):293-308. doi:10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2006.12.003
Cousineau TM, and Domar AD. "Psychological impact of infertility." Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology, vol. 21, no. 2, 2007, pp. 293-308.
Prior studies among women with impaired fecundity have consistently demonstrated a positive association between daily perceived stress and the ability to conceive. However, the effects of daily stress on time to pregnancy (TTP) among women with proven fertility is not known. One hundred and forty-three women ages 18-35, in a relationship of proven fertility, who desired to conceive were included in the analysis. Daily diaries recording perceived stress (scale 0-10) were completed for up to 7 menstrual cycles or until pregnancy. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to estimate the association between time-varying perceived stress tertiles (high [>4.1-7.2], moderate [>2.7-4.1], and low [0.1-2.7]) and adjusted fecundability odds ratio (aFOR), 95% confidence intervals (CI), after taking into account age, parity, education, time-varying caffeine and alcohol intake, fertility awareness tracking, and cycle intent to conceive. Among the 111 participants who completed daily diaries, 90 (81.1%) conceived. Women reporting high or moderate stress, versus low stress, had no difference in probability of achieving pregnancy (aFOR: 1.11 [95% CI: 0.58, 2.14]; and aFOR: 1.37 [0.71, 2.67]), respectively. Additional adjustment for intercourse frequency during narrow fertile window, or narrowing exposure focus to pre-ovulatory or pre-implantation stress did not appreciably alter the estimates. Daily perceived stress was not adversely associated with TTP among women with proven fertility. While a growing body of evidence supports adverse effects of more severe stressful life events on female reproductive function, moderate psychological stress, commonly referred to as eustress, among relatively healthy women with proven fertility does not appear to adversely impact TTP.
Rooney KL et al., 2018·Dialogues in clinical neuroscience
The relationship between stress and infertility has been debated for years. Women with infertility report elevated levels of anxiety and depression, so it is clear that infertility causes stress. What is less clear, however, is whether or not stress causes infertility. The impact of distress on treatment outcome is difficult to investigate for a number of factors, including inaccurate self-report measures and feelings of increased optimism at treatment onset. However, the most recent research has documented the efficacy of psychological interventions in lowering psychological distress as well as being associated with significant increases in pregnancy rates. A cognitive-behavioral group approach may be the most efficient way to achieve both goals. Given the distress levels reported by many infertile women, it is vital to expand the availability of these programs.
mental-health-and-psychosocial/infertility-distress/anxiety-and-depression-in-infertilitylifestyle-and-environment/stress-and-allostatic-load/stress-and-ovulationassisted-reproduction/outcomes/live-birth-rates
Open Access
To examine whether pretreatment emotional distress in women is associated with achievement of pregnancy after a cycle of assisted reproductive technology. Meta-analysis of prospective psychosocial studies. PubMed, Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, PsychNET, ISI Web of Knowledge, and ISI Web of Science were searched for articles published from 1985 to March 2010 (inclusive). We also undertook a hand search of reference lists and contacted 29 authors. Eligible studies were prospective studies reporting a test of the association between pretreatment emotional distress (anxiety or depression) and pregnancy in women undergoing a single cycle of assisted reproductive technology. Review methods Two authors independently assessed the studies for eligibility and quality (using criteria adapted from the Newcastle-Ottawa quality scale) and extracted data. Authors contributed additional data not included in original publication. Fourteen studies with 3583 infertile women undergoing a cycle of fertility treatment were included in the meta-analysis. The effect size used was the standardised mean difference (adjusted for small sample size) in pretreatment anxiety or depression (priority on anxiety where both measured) between women who achieved a pregnancy (defined as a positive pregnancy test, positive fetal heart scan, or live birth) and those who did not. Pretreatment emotional distress was not associated with treatment outcome after a cycle of assisted reproductive technology (standardised mean difference -0.04, 95% confidence interval -0.11 to 0.03 (fixed effects model); heterogeneity I2=14%, P=0.30). Subgroup analyses according to previous experience of assisted reproductive technology, composition of the not pregnant group, and timing of the emotional assessment were not significant. The effect size did not vary according to study quality, but a significant subgroup analysis on timing of the pregnancy test, a contour enhanced funnel plot, and Egger's test indicated the presence of moderate publication bias. The findings of this meta-analysis should reassure women and doctors that emotional distress caused by fertility problems or other life events co-occurring with treatment will not compromise the chance of becoming pregnant.
An adaptive model for the evolution of reproductive failure predicted psychosocial stress to increase as anatomic causes of infertility decrease. The nonanatomic infertility group in our study reported greater psychosocial stress than intermediate (P < 0.008) or anatomic groups (P < 0.0005). Controls, women with nonanatomic etiologies who were not attempting pregnancy, also reported higher psychosocial stress than the anatomic group (P < 0.007). Results are consistent with the hypothesis that psychosocial distress contributes significantly to the etiology of some forms of infertility.