Patient attitudes towards and satisfaction with subcutaneous injection of progesterone versus vaginal administration in assisted reproductive technology treatment.

The hormones used in fertility treatment come in various forms. Progesterone used for luteal phase support is often administered vaginally as either suppositories, tablets or gel. However, in Denmark the administration of progesterone as a subcutaneous injection has newly been introduced. The aim of the study was to explore patient attitudes towards and satisfaction with subcutaneous injection of progesterone versus vaginal administration of progesterone in Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) treatments.
Methods and Analysis: A qualitative study with online and face to face interviews with a total of 19 women undergoing an ART treatment. Only women with at least one previous blastocyst transfer using vaginal progesterone or subcutaneous progesterone could be recruited. All participants were included from either the Fertility Clinic at Copenhagen University Hospital - Herlev and Gentofte or from the Fertility Unit at Aalborg University Hospital.
Results: The analysis resulted in four themes: (1) medication, (2) everyday life, (3) bodily experiences and (4) infertility or hope. Most informants highlighted the administration of subcutaneous progesterone only once a day and avoidance of the vaginal discharge as clear advantages. Reasons for preferring the vaginal administration were inconvenience of bringing the subcutaneous medication along and resistance to inject oneself.
Conclusion: The findings of this study suggest that the satisfaction with the subcutaneous progesterone is generally positive. However, valuable thoughts have given insights into possible areas, which could be improved. Further, that some women prefer vaginal progesterone. The results show that the women are interested in being included in the decision-making when choosing the administration form of progesterone.
Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
(Copyright © 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)