Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Assessment of environmental knowledge and needs among assisted reproductive technology professionals

  • Assisted Reproduction Technologies
  • Published:
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Exposure to environmental contaminants is to be taken into account in preventive healthcare in general and particularly in the field of reproduction according to the increasing amount of evidence data being published. The aim of this study is to evaluate the practices and interest in and basic knowledge of environmental health, by the professionals of the ART process: doctor, embryologist, and nurses.

Methods

Survey among 12 Belgian assisted reproductive technology (ART) centers.

Results

The response rate was 67%: 43.5% of the ART professionals do bring up the topic of environmental contaminants with their patients, without significant differences among types of professionals. Ninety percent of respondents believe that it would be useful, and 63% mention their lack of knowledge and the absence of solutions (20.5%) to explain their inaction. Lack of knowledge is much greater for nurses respectively (85%) compared with doctors (52%) and biologists (54%). The most popular means toward improving their knowledge is scientific seminars (69%). The questionnaire to evaluate the health professional knowledge gives 56% of adequate replies. The topic concerning eating habits obtains a very bad score of knowledge. When looking at exposure to occupational risks, 75% of the answers were correct.

Conclusions

The place of ART before conception makes it an ideal entry point for the prevention of environmental hazards. This study corroborates the previous observations which underline the importance to reinforce the concepts of environmental health in the initial and continuous training of health professionals.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Crude data of web survey available on request in French.

References

  1. Di Renzo GC, et al. International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics opinion on reproductive health impacts of exposure to toxic environmental chemicals. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2015;131(3):219–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2015.09.002.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. ACOG Committee Opinion No 575. Exposure to toxic environmental agents. Fertil Steril. 2013;100(4):931–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.08.043.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Sutton P, et al. Toxic environmental chemicals: the role of reproductive health professionals in preventing harmful exposures. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;207(3):164–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2012.01.034.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Caserta D, et al. Environment and women’s reproductive health. Hum Reprod Update. 2011;17(3):418–33. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmq061.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Rattan S, Zhou C, Chiang C, Mahalingam S, Brehm E, Flaws JA. Exposure to endocrine disruptors during adulthood: consequences for female fertility. J Endocrinol. 2017;233(3):R109–29. https://doi.org/10.1530/JOE-17-0023.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Heindel JJ, et al. Developmental origins of health and disease: integrating environmental influences. Endocrinology. 2015;156(10):3416–21. https://doi.org/10.1210/EN.2015-1394.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Cordier S, et al. Exposure during pregnancy to glycol ethers and chlorinated solvents and the risk of congenital malformations. Epidemiology. 2012;23(6):806–12. https://doi.org/10.1097/EDE.0b013e31826c2bd8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hoover RN, et al. Adverse health outcomes in women exposed in utero to diethylstilbestrol. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(14):1304–14. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1013961.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Garlantézec R, et al. Urinary glycol ether metabolites in women and time to pregnancy: the PELAGIE cohort. Environ Health Perspect. 2013;121(10):1167–73. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1206103.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Skakkebaek NE, et al. Male reproductive disorders and fertility trends: influences of environment and genetic susceptibility. Physiol Rev. 2016;96(1):55–97. https://doi.org/10.1152/physrev.00017.2015.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. WHO | Archived: Essential Nutrition Actions. WHO. http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/infantfeeding/essential_nutrition_actions/en/.

  12. De Geyter C, et al. ART in Europe, 2015: results generated from European registries by ESHRE. Hum Reprod Open. 2020;2020(1):hoz038. https://doi.org/10.1093/hropen/hoz038.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Bashiri A, Halper KI, Orvieto R. Recurrent implantation failure-update overview on etiology, diagnosis, treatment and future directions. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2018;16(1):121. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12958-018-0414-2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Sunyach C, Antonelli B, Tardieu S, Marcot M, Perrin J, Bretelle F. Environmental health in perinatal and early childhood: awareness, representation, knowledge and practice of Southern France perinatal health professionals. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018;15(10):15. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15102259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Stotland NE, et al. Counseling patients on preventing prenatal environmental exposures--a mixed-methods study of obstetricians. PLoS One. 2014;9(6):e98771. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0098771.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Poissons et produits de la pêche, conseils de consommation | Anses - Agence nationale de sécurité sanitaire de l’alimentation, de l’environnement et du travail. https://www.anses.fr/fr/content/poissons-et-produits-de-la-p%C3%AAche-conseils-de-consommation-1. Accessed 27 Feb 2019.

  17. Williamson L, Sangster S, Bayly M, Gibson K, Lawson K, Clark M. A needs assessment on addressing environmental health issues within reproductive health service provision: considerations for continuing education and support. Can Med Educ J. 2017;8(4):e65–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Teysseire R, Brochard P, Sentilhes L, Delva F. Identification and prioritization of environmental reproductive hazards: a first step in establishing environmental perinatal care. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019;16(3):28. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16030366.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Marie C, Lémery D, Vendittelli F, Sauvant-Rochat M-P. Perception of environmental risks and health promotion attitudes of French perinatal health professionals. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2016;13(12):18. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph13121255.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Chabert M-C, Perrin J, Berbis J, Bretelle F, Adnot S, Courbiere B. Lack of information received by a French female cohort regarding prevention against exposure to reprotoxic agents during pregnancy. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016;205:15–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2016.07.504.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Torjusen H, et al. Reduced risk of pre-eclampsia with organic vegetable consumption: results from the prospective Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort Study. BMJ Open. 2014;4(9):e006143. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006143.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Slama R, et al. Epidemiologic tools to study the influence of environmental factors on fecundity and pregnancy-related outcomes. Epidemiol Rev. 2014;36:148–64. https://doi.org/10.1093/epirev/mxt011.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Tinney VA, Paulson JA, Bathgate SL, Larsen JW. Medical education for obstetricians and gynecologists should incorporate environmental health. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;212(2):163–166.e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2014.07.038.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Annick Delvigne thank Jeanne Perrin, Florence Bretelle, and Claire Sunyach for the certificate in environmental health in perinatology and fertility delivered at the Timone Faculty, University of Marseille; the final dissertation for this certificate initiates this paper. The authors thank all the ART professionals who kindly accepted to answer the survey. The authors are grateful to Mary Stevens, Stephanie Johnson, and Vandromme Oscar for English improvements.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. ART center, Clinique CHC MontLégia, Liège, Belgium

    Annick Delvigne

  2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, CHU Saint Pierre, Brussels, Belgium

    Jean Vandromme

Authors
  1. Annick Delvigne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jean Vandromme
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

JV: conceived and designed the experiments, realized the web questionnaire, and contributes to the analyses of data and to the statistical analyses.

AD: conceived, designed, and performed the experiments; analyzed and interpreted the data; and wrote the paper.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Annick Delvigne.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approvals

Authorization to conduct the study given by the local ethics committee in accordance with the new European regulations regarding the protection of personal data, from May 2018 (RGPD) received on April 10, 2019.

Consent to participate

The study is an anonymous survey of a target group of professionals involved in the ART process before conception, and an email requesting participation in a study constitutes the informed consent.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Table 4 Web questionnaire environment health and fertility
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Delvigne, A., Vandromme, J. Assessment of environmental knowledge and needs among assisted reproductive technology professionals. J Assist Reprod Genet 37, 2347–2355 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-020-01888-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-020-01888-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation