Awareness and attitude toward oocyte cryopreservation for non-medical reasons: a study on women candidates for social egg freezing

Abstract

Purpose

The present study was to investigate awareness and attitudes toward female fertility and aging, desire for a child and motherhood, and oocyte freezing for non-medical reasons among women candidates for Social Egg Freezing (SEF).

Materials and Methods

This was a cross-sectional study on all 216 women who sought oocyte cryopreservation for nonmedical reasons at Royan Institute. A 24-item self-administered questionnaire measured knowledge and attitudes to SEF. Responses were as yes/no or a 4-point Likert scale.

Results

Only 40% of participants accurately indicated that having a sexual partner does not help to preserve their fertility. A quarter of women correctly recalled chance of pregnancy with unprotected intercourse during a period of a year, for women 20 to 40 years old. Only one-third of respondents accurately identified the age-related fertility decline at 35–39 years. Only 6.9% correctly mentioned the low chance of pregnancy after egg freezing at 35 years old. Almost a third of women knew that the age range of 31–35 years is the right age to freeze an egg with the highest chance of pregnancy. Aging and health of offspring were most influential in women’s decisions on SEF.

Conclusion

In conclusion, there was significant gaps in knowledge about age-related fertility decline, and egg cryopreservation conditions and its complications. It is crucial to impart to these women a better knowledge about fertility and a realistic picture about SEF, especially on the number of high-quality retrieved mature oocytes and live birth rates depend on women's age.

Keywords:

• Oocyte cryopreservation
• verification
• fertility preservation
• social egg freezing
• infertility

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Dr. Morteza Karimi (PhD in Anthropology, University of Tehran) for her assistance with all aspects of study design and implementation.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).