The Etiology of Infertility Affects Fertility Quality of Life of Males Undergoing Fertility Workup and Treatment

Abstract

This panel study explored the effects of male, female, mixed, or idiopathic factor of infertility on the fertility quality of life (FertiQoL) in involuntarily childless males undergoing fertility workup for the first time. A convenience sample of 255 married males (age range = 22–51 years, mean = 30.24 years), 254 (99.6%) of whom suffered from primary infertility were assessed (1) at the baseline, before their initial fertility evaluation (T1); (2) before their second andrological appointment, 2–3 months after diagnostic disclosure (T2); and (3) before subsequent treatment-related/ follow-up appointments (T3, T4). The timing of psychological assessment was strictly related to andrological appointments and routine medical procedures. Respondents completed Emotional, Mind–Body, Relational, and Social subscales of the Polish version of FertiQoL and a baseline demographic survey. The research demonstrated that the FertiQoL scores across the Emotional, Mind–Body, and Relational subscales markedly decreased after the diagnostic disclosure, particularly in the subgroups with male and concurrent male and female factor. Social subscale scores in all subgroups remained stable after the diagnostic disclosure (at T2) but significantly decreased in the follow-up (at T3 and T4). Significant differences in FertiQoL scores associated with respondents’ infertility factor could be demonstrated at each time point. The study identifies the FertiQoL in unintentionally childless males is significantly affected by their factor of infertility and evolves across the pathway of treatment-related/follow-up appointments.

Male Attitudes towards Infertility: Results from a Global Questionnaire

“…For more positive change to occur regarding men’s attitudes towards infertility, a starting point is to ask men what their needs are rather than them having to accept what their needs are perceived to be. For example, administering a standardized ‘quality of life’ assessment to the male prior to initiating care and then intermittently throughout treatment has the possibility to reveal changes in emotional and psychosomatic wellbeing that might reveal a man’s emotional need for professional intervention [ 27 ]. Having an established support program in the MAR setting could be very beneficial not only for the man but also his partner as they progress through treatment.…”

Assessment of Quality of Life in Men Treated for Infertility in Poland

“…In other studies, the reported results were 83.3 [ 15 ], 60.6 [ 25 ], and 69.9 [ 16 ]. Warchol-Biedermann conducted a study among males treated for infertility in another large town in Poland [ 26 ]. The lowest Core FertiQoL score was 75.23, while the highest score obtained by men in this study was 71.1.…”

“…The place of residence in a large city positively correlated with the declared level of the quality of life [ 16 , 27 ]. Men examined by Warchol–Biedermann started treatment for the first time, and during the treatment cycle the level of their quality of life decreased [ 26 ]. The men in the presented study group were before starting the treatment cycle; however, this was not necessarily their first cycle.…”

Global Research Trends on Infertility and Psychology From the Past Two Decades: A Bibliometric and Visualized Study

“…Men’s age, income, causes of infertility, prognosis, duration of infertility, treatment costs, and perceived social support can all affect the male partner’s mood, and the physical and psychological burdens generated during diagnosis and treatment can affect the couple’s life quality ( 9 ). Katarzyna’s study found that ongoing infertility treatment could reduce the social functioning of male partners, leading to decreased perceived social support, increased social isolation, and an inability to meet social expectations associated with pregnancy ( 77 ). Such shame, guilt, and confusion toward parents, wives, colleagues, and even marriage will lead to secrecy about the disease and communication barriers to follow-up treatment.…”