Oocyte donors comprehension as assessed by the EDICT Egg Donor Informed Consent Tool

For the first time, we report oocyte donors’ comprehension of the process and risks associated with oocyte donation as assessed by the Egg Donor Informed Consent Tool (EDICT).

Like Comment

Authors

Amanda Skillern, M.D., Marcelle I. Cedars, M.D., Heather G. Huddleston, M.D.

Volume 101, Issue 1, Pages 248-251, January 2014

Abstract

Objective:

To assess oocyte donors’ comprehension of the process and potential risks of oocyte donation using the EDICT (Egg Donor Informed Consent Tool).

Design:

Prospective cohort study.

Setting:

University-based, tertiary reproductive health practice.

Patient(s):

Prospective oocyte donors.

Intervention(s):

Donors (N = 65) participated in an audiovisual informational session, and met with a reproductive endocrinologist individually. Donors then completed the Subjective EDICT and Objective EDICT.

Main Outcome Measure(s):

We report scores on Subjective and Objective EDICT, scores stratified for demographic variables, relationship between Subjective and Objective EDICT scores, and the effect of counseling on scores.

Result(s):

In general, our cohort of oocyte donors performed well on both objective and subjective portions of the EDICT. We verified the effect of counseling on EDICT scores by comparing before and after counseling scores and demonstrating significant gains. There was no significant correlation between Subjective and Objective EDICT scores.

Conclusion(s):

For the first time, we report oocyte donors’ comprehension of oocyte donation as assessed by the EDICT. Reassuringly, we demonstrate that oocyte donors have adequate subjective and objective comprehension of the process and risks associated with oocyte donation. We also demonstrate that oocyte donor comprehension is significantly impacted by physician counseling efforts. In addition, scores on perceived understanding (Subjective EDICT) did not predict scores on performance-based comprehension (Objective EDICT). The lack of correlation between the two scores further underscores the utility of a performance-based tool, as relying on a donor’s self-report (e.g., simply signing a consent form to indicate understanding) may not reflect her actual understanding.

Read the full text at: http://www.fertstert.org/article/S0015-0282(13)03068-9/fulltext


Fertility and Sterility

Editorial Office, American Society for Reproductive Medicine

Fertility and Sterility® is an international journal for obstetricians, gynecologists, reproductive endocrinologists, urologists, basic scientists and others who treat and investigate problems of infertility and human reproductive disorders. The journal publishes juried original scientific articles in clinical and laboratory research relevant to reproductive endocrinology, urology, andrology, physiology, immunology, genetics, contraception, and menopause. Fertility and Sterility® encourages and supports meaningful basic and clinical research, and facilitates and promotes excellence in professional education, in the field of reproductive medicine.

No comments yet.