Aspects of the quality of life of children born with the use of assisted reproductive technologies to women of late reproductive age

Cover Page


Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In recent decades, an increasing number of women worldwide have been postponing childbearing, and the birth of children is possible with increasing frequency in late reproductive age only with the use of assisted reproductive technologies. The persistence of this tendency determines the relevance of studying the characteristics of the quality of life of children born as a result of assisted reproductive technologies by women of late reproductive age, as well as subsequent work with factors that affect the quality of life of this group of children.

AIM: This study aimed to analyze and determine the characteristics of the quality of life of children born with the use of assisted reproductive technologies by women of late reproductive age.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: The main group of subjects consisted of preschool children (4–6 years old) born to women over 35 years old (249 children), whereas 248 children of the same age were enrolled as a control group. Conception with the use of assisted reproductive technologies was the main distinguishing feature of the main and control groups. Informed consent was obtained from the parents for the participation of children in the study. The protocol was approved by the local ethics committee of the Samara State Medical University of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation. A survey was performed using the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (validated Russian version 4.0) parental form for age categories of 2–4 and 5–7 years, as well as a pediatric version for 5–7 years of age.

RESULTS: The quality of life of the main group had significantly lower indicators compared to the control group, with an average score in the general quality of life of 64.5±2.5 and 79.5±3.1 in the main and control group, respective, p=0.047. This is mainly due to the lower values of the communicative aspect and the quality of life in kindergarten. The average quality of life score in the field of communication was 70.4±4.3 and 83.9±3.4 in the main group and control group, respectively. Additionally, the average quality of life score in the kindergarten was 40.3±2.6 and 84.2±3.3 in the main and control group.

CONCLUSIONS: The quality of life of preschool children born with the use of assisted reproductive technologies to women of late reproductive age significantly differs from those in the control group. Children born with the use of assisted reproductive technologies have a comparable quality of life in physical activity and emotional state; however, this group experiences the greatest difficulties in the field of communication, especially in kindergarten with peers. These aspects of functioning require special attention from the parents and pediatricians, as well as adjustments within the health-improving measures that are performed in this group of children.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

Kirill A. Kuzmichev

Samara State Medical University

Author for correspondence.
Email: kirill.kuzmichev@yahoo.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-5853-1838
Russian Federation, Samara

Olga V. Tyumina

Samara State Medical University; Samara Regional Medical Center "Dynasty"

Email: centr123@bk.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-5608-1925

MD, Dr. Sci. (Med.)

Russian Federation, Samara; Samara

Olga B. Chertukhina

Samara State Medical University

Email: olga7754@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-2230-7292

MD, Dr. Sci. (Med.), Professor

Russian Federation, Samara

Natalia V. Polunina

N.I. Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University

Email: nvpol@rambler.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-8772-4631

MD, Dr. Sci. (Med.), Professor, Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences

Russian Federation, Moscow

References

  1. Baranov AA, Al'bitskiy VYu, Vinyarskaya IV. Study of the quality of life in medicine and pediatrics. Current рediatrics (Moscow). 2005;4(2):7–12. (In Russ).
  2. Baranov AA, Al'bitskiy VYu, Vinyarskaya IV, et al. Itogi, zadachi i perspektivy izucheniya kachestva zhizni v otechestvennoi pediatrii sotsial'naya pediatriya i organizatsiya zdravookhraneniya. Current pediatrics (Moscow). 2007;6(3):6–8. (In Russ).
  3. Timofeyeva AG, Vinyarskaya IV. Quality of life of children with chronic diseases. Current Рediatrics (Moscow). 2008;7(6):28–29. Available from: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/issledovanie-kachestva-zhizni-u-detey-s-hronicheskimi-zabolevaniyami. (In Russ).
  4. Sabirova AV, Volosnikov DK, Kireeva GN, et al. Indicators of the quality of life of healthy children living in villages and cities of the Chelyabinsk region. Pediatric Вulletin of the South Ural. 2017;(2):74–81. (In Russ).
  5. Pavlenko TN, Murzina IuM. Studying the quality of life of preschool children. Practical medicine. 2008;30:91. Available from: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/izuchenie-kachestva-zhizni-detey-doshkolnogo-vozrasta. (In Russ).
  6. Pavlenko TN, Katzova GB, Maleyeva NP. The dynamics of individual health, the life conditions and its quantity in children visiting pre-school educational organizations of Orenburg. Public Health and Life Environment – PH&LE. 2013;(6):35–38. Available from: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/dinamika-individualnogo-zdorovya-usloviya-i-kachestvo-zhizni-detey-poseschayuschih-detskie-doshkolnye-obrazovatelnye-uchrezhdeniya. (In Russ).
  7. Vikhareva EG, Viniarskaia IV, Khan MA et al. About quality of life of children of senior school age in the Republic of Udmurtia. Problems of Social Hygiene, Public Health and History of Medicine, Russian journal. 2016;24(2):74–76. Available from: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/o-kachestve-zhizni-detey-starshego-shkolnogo-vozrasta-v-udmurtskoy-respublike. (In Russ).
  8. Volgina SYa, Kurmayeva EA The quality of life of preschool children from poor families. Kazan Medical Journal. 2010;91(1):91–94. Available from: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/kachestvo-zhizni-detey-doshkolnogo-vozrasta-iz-bednyh-semey. (In Russ).
  9. Plaxina AN, Kovtun OP, Blokhina SI. Quality of life estimation of children born after assisted reproductive technologies. System Integration in Health Care. 2011;(1):83–89. (In Russ).
  10. Plaxina AN. Predicting the health and quality of life of children born with assisted reproductive technology [dissertation]. Ekaterinburg; 2011. (In Russ).
  11. Knoester M, Helmerhorst FM, van der Westerlaken LA, et al. Matched follow-up study of 5 8-year-old ICSI singletons: child behaviour, parenting stress and child (health-related) quality of life. Hum Reprod. 2007;22(12):3098-3107. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dem261
  12. Wagenaar K, Huisman J, Cohen-Kettenis PT, Delemarre-van de Waal HA. An overview of studies on early development, cognition, and psychosocial well-being in children born after in vitro fertilization. J Dev Behav Pediatr. 2008;29(3):219–230. doi: 10.1097/DBP.0b013e318173a575
  13. Malievskiy VA, Malievskiy OA, Bashirova GI et al. Methodological approaches to the assessment of quality of life in children. Russian pediatric journal. 2015;18(5):50–56. Available from: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/metodologicheskie-podhody-k-otsenke-kachestva-zhizni-detey. (In Russ).
  14. Bahadova EV. New approach to definition of children’ health using a technique of an estimation of quality of life. Social aspects of population health. 2008;(4):5. Available from: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/novyy-podhod-k-opredeleniyu-zdorovya-detey-s-primeneniem-metodiki-otsenki-kachestva-zhizni. (In Russ).
  15. Kuftyak EV. Study of the quality of life of children in the context of attachment to mother. Meditsinskaya psikhologiya v Rossii. 2018;10(6):2. Available from: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/issledovanie-kachestva-zhizni-detey-v-kontekste-privyazannosti-k-materi. (In Russ). doi: 10.24411/2219-82452018-16020
  16. Yur'yev VK, Sayfulin MH. Changes in quality of life as a criterion of effectiveness of hospital treatment. Current pediatrics (Moscow). 2009;8(6):7–11. Available from: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/otsenka-dinamiki-kachestva-zhizni-detey-kak-kriteriy-effektivnosti-statsionarnogo-lecheniya. (In Russ).
  17. Burkhanova SV, Krom IL. Quality of life as a tool for assessing children's health. Nauka i sovremennost'. 2010;(6-1):223–227. Available from: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/kachestvo-zhizni-kak-instrument-otsenki-zdorovya-detey. (In Russ).
  18. Latyshev DYu, Lobanov YF, Mikheeva NM et al. Quality of life research opportunities in clinical practice in children. Bulletin of Novosibirsk State University. Series: Biology, clinical medicine. 2014;12(1):81–84. (In Russ).

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. Fig. Results of the quality of life assessment of children using the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory questionnaire. * p <0.05 compared to the control group.

Download (50KB)

Copyright (c) 2021 Eco-Vector



This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies