the future of reproductive medicine: creating a health ... evaluation report.pdf · physician’s...

Pacific Coast Reproductive Society 61st Annual Meeting April 17 to 21, 2013

"The Future of Reproductive Medicine: Creating a Health Care System"

Results: As Assessed by Attendee Evaluations Pre- and Post-test Comparative Analysis


Table of Contents

The Evaluation Process Page 3

Results Summary Page 3 - 4

CME Mission Statement Page 5 - 7

Reconciliation of Goals & Objectives to Documented Results Page 8

Faculty Ranking Page 9

Analysis of the Results – Gaps & Needs Page 10 - 12

Evaluation Detailed Results: Overall Program Page 13

Changes to practice Page 14 - 15 Patient Outcomes Page 16 - 17

Program Improvements Page 18 – 19 Future PCRS events 0 Wednesday April 17

Attendance and Session Ratings Page 21 Faculty Ratings Page 22

Thursday April 18 Attendance and Session Ratings Page 23 Faculty Ratings Page 24

Friday April 19 Attendance and Session Ratings Page 25 Faculty Ratings Page 26

Saturday April 20 Attendance and Session Ratings Page 27 Faculty Ratings Page 28

Pre and Post Test Results Page 29 - 44


The Evaluation Process: Attendees of the 61st Annual Meeting were asked to complete evaluation forms to:

• Provide data for PCRS to evaluate the effectiveness of its CME activities in meeting identified educational needs (as detailed in the Final Program and on our website)

• Evaluate the effectiveness of its overall program of CME (see CME Mission Statement and Overall Objectives enclosed).

Through careful analysis of this data, gaps in participant knowledge/competence or performance are identified and needs of physicians, their teams, and allied professionals are assessed and used to plan our future CME activities. All evaluation forms asked attendees to indicate the degree with which they agreed with specific statements, using a ranking of 1 to 5 (1 representing “Strongly Disagree” and 5 representing “Strongly Agree”). As the following pages demonstrate, our 61st Annual Meeting was an extremely successful CME experience. Our attendees completed 112 online evaluation surveys that covered the general overall meeting as well as each individual session. The combined forms included specific questions designed to reveal how well our planning targeted the needs of our constituents in 2013 and to provide data for our 2014 identification of gaps and needs assessment process. Results: As with all Continuing Medical Education, we have three major benchmarks against which we can measure success. Have we aided in the improvement of (a) competence, (b) performance, and (c) patient outcomes? The results of this evaluation process clearly show PCRS continues to successfully meet its expectations, as set forth in the CME Mission Statement, to enhance the physician’s ability to recognize, diagnose, treat, manage, and/or appropriately refer patients with reproductive disorders or diseases in a timely manner to effectively treat the patient resulting in enhanced outcomes. Total

Responses Positive

Responses Percentage

I gained knowledge/practice skills/experience that will increase my competence

112 112 100.0%

I gained knowledge/practice skills/experience that will improve my performance

112 112 100.0%

I gained knowledge/practice skills/experience that will improve patient outcomes

112 112 100.0%

The following pages include detailed analysis of all questions asked of our attendees as well as their comments. Ranking reports have been included that measure the overall quality of our faculty as well as the oral presentation of original scientific research.

2013 Annual Meeting:The Future of Reproductive Medicine: Creating A Healthcare System

Updated December 2012

PACIFIC COAST REPRODUCTIVE SOCIETY (PCRS)

CME MISSION STATEMENT Vision PCRS is a global, interactive organization championing the field of reproductive medicine. Values: PCRS believes in…

Support of physicians, their teams, and allied professionals Innovation Inclusiveness Collegiality Professional Development

Purpose: The Pacific Coast Reproductive Society’s (PCRS) global commitment to exceptional patient care is embodied in the continuing medical education of physicians, their teams, and allied professionals. Promoting the highest standards of clinical practice, patient safety, and improved patient outcomes, related to the treatment of infertility, is consistent with the principles and goals of PCRS. The Pacific Coast Reproductive Society’s CME program is based on the integration of clinical practice, scientific research, and education in Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ART) Consistent with these values, the following goals of PCRS/CME are intended to:

1. Cultivate an atmosphere for thinking differently, unconventionally, or from new perspectives 2. Offer thought provoking programming enabling physicians, their teams, and allied health care

professionals provide superior medical care for patients 3. Update or reinforce knowledge of current concepts, techniques or practices 4. Promote innovation in clinical practice and research 5. Foster the integration of advances in relevant scientific and clinical research ensuring clinicians

access to timely and relevant information 6. Enable clinicians to recognize, practice, discuss, and apply new concepts, technologies, or

practices, as they relate to the management of infertility in their specific area of clinical practice or research

7. Further the identification and recognition of ethical, psychological, and cultural patient concerns 8. Provide a forum for clinicians, academicians and other professionals in allied fields to create or

renew collegial and collaborative relationships that enhance their effectiveness, promote high standards of clinical practice, patient safety, and improved patient outcomes

9. Facilitate a career-long continuum of medical education. 10. PCRS accomplishes these goals through its Annual Meeting, which includes multiple disciplines (in

reproductive medicine) in an educational program attracting regional, national and international participants including but not limited to:

Target Audience Practicing physicians, physicians in training, and scientists in training in the field of reproductive medicine representing:

• Andrology/Male Infertility • Reproductive Endocrinology • Obstetrics and Gynecology

Physician team members and allied health professionals representing: • Complementary Healthcare • Mental Health • Nursing

2013 Annual MeetingThe Future of Reproductive Medicine: Creating A Healthcare System

Updated December 2012

• Reproductive Biologists/Laboratory Specialists • Outside Agencies

o Third Party Agencies o Genetic Laboratories

Content Areas

• Clinical Practice • Basic and Clinical Science • Advances in Technology • Legal Issues • Ethics • Psychological Impact of Reproductive Conditions/Diseases • Surgery • Alternative/Complementary Medicine • Practice Management • Managed Care • Government Regulation

Presentation topics relate to the overall theme of the meeting and are identified through needs assessment and evaluations. Additional or new topics are identified through surveys and evaluations of meeting participants, including current or advancing knowledge in the field of reproductive medicine. Types of Activities PCRS/CME blends a variety of learning formats to help meet learners’ professional development needs and learning style through personal interaction with guest faculty, clinicians, scientists, clinical scholars, and each other in a collegial, intimate atmosphere. Sessions are designed across the spectrum of learning modalities used by individuals to process information to memory: visual (learning by seeing), auditory (learning by hearing), and kinesthetic (learning by doing). • Plenary Sessions address issues of general interest to all participants. • Breakout Sessions reflect the diversity of participants and include basic to advanced tracks on

specific topics of interest. • Oral and Poster Sessions highlight the presentation of papers based on original scientific research.

Time is scheduled for Q&A/discussion after each presentation. While there is often rigorous discussion, PCRS prides itself on being a forum for researchers to present their work and develop their presentation skills in a non-threatening environment.

• Interactive Lectures address issues and concepts in the general scope of reproductive medicine. Faculties are requested to “talk with rather than at” learners incorporating group discussion, Q&A, and debate opportunities into their presentation.

• Round Tables/ Forums/Panels/Debates expose participants to different, conflicting, or controversial points of view related to specific treatments, procedures or concepts. Small group discussions allow participants to communicate their own thoughts, questions, ideas, or experiences, providing an opportunity for the sharing of information and ideas in an informal, comfortable format.

• Hand-On-Workshops provide the opportunity for participants to become familiar with advances in technology and techniques or refine existing skills with the latest equipment and technologies.

• Collaborative Workshops provide the opportunity for participants to discuss hot topics, learn from peers, and share information with colleagues about issues they encounter in their daily practice in an intimate, non-threatening environment.

2013 Annual MeetingThe Future of Reproductive Medicine: Creating A Healthcare System

EXPECTED RESULTS

The ultimate goal of the PCRS CME program is to address both the learner’s identified needs as well as those needs not self-identified which close gaps in practice that prevent the deliver of consistently high quality healthcare to all patients at all times.

PCRS understands physicians may not engage in self-assessment on a regular basis, hence, the need for CME planners to identify and assess new or updated protocols, treatments, theories, and tools for consistently patient-centric education. While individual physicians may not be familiar with or want to address topical social issues, PCRS believes in CME which promotes changes in attitude, competence, performance, and positive patient outcomes that enhance and increase the learner’s ability to:

Recognize Diagnose Treat, Manage, and/or Appropriately refer patients with reproductive disorders or diseases in a timely manner

Updated: December 2012

Pacific Coast Reproductive Society61st Annual Meeting, April 17 to 21, 2013

Reconciliation of Goals & Objectives to Documented ResultsOverall Documented Results:

Goals and Objectives Measurement Matches to stated objectives for courses: Evaluation Responses

KnowledgeCompetence Attended Agree Disagree % Agree

65 65 0 100.0%


85 83 2 97.6%


86 85 1 98.8%

Knowledge

Competence Attended Agree Disagree % Agree76 74 2 97.4%

Knowledge


Knowledge


Knowledge



86 82 4 95.3%

Knowledge


Examine methods to predict embryo viability based on dynamic imaging data (time-lapse)

Legally Speaking: Update on Personhood and Other Legal Battles, Speakers: Atlee Breland, Sean B. Tipton, Barbara Collura

PGD/PGS, Speaker: Santiago Munne, PhD

Translational Medicine / Stem Cells, Speaker: Alan O. Trounson, PhD

Identify and assess current legal issues in medicine The session met objectives stated in the program:

The session met objectives stated in the program:




Embryo Development and Aneuploidy: Practical Application of Time-Lapse Imaging and Time-Lapse Markers, Speaker: Alice A. Chen, PhD

Update on Male Infertility, Speaker: Robert Oates, MD, FACS

The Future of Surgery, Speaker: Vipul Patel, MD, FACS

Protocols for Special Needs Patients, Speaker: Tamara M. Tobias, ARNP




Identify emerging research regarding surgical retrieval of sperm for IVF

Discuss emerging fields of 3D and telesurgery

Assess why one protocol may better suit a patient with special needs over another

Identify new technologies to appropriately diagnosis the status of all chromosomes within the human embryo

Identify what is on the horizon for stem cell research

Learn how to create a care team, a coordinated multidisciplinary group of healthcare professionals

Transforming Care Teams to Provide the Best Possible Patient-Centered, Collaborative Care, Speaker: Francisco Arredondo, MD


Identify the difficulties of research combining TCM and Western Medicine

Blending of Western and Eastern Medicine in Reproductive Therapies Speaker: Francisco Arredondo, MD

Answer Options Yes No% With

Opinion Voted Yes

No OpinionResponse

Count

Alan O. Trounson, PhD 66 0 100.0% 41 107Robert Oates, MD, FACS 82 0 100.0% 25 107Sarah L. Berga, MD 85 0 100.0% 22 107Sarah L. Berga, MD 68 0 100.0% 41 109Z. Peter Nagy, MD, PhD 68 0 100.0% 39 107Catherine Racowsky, PhD, HCLD 78 1 98.7% 28 107Sean B. Tipton 46 1 97.9% 60 107Jacques Cohen, PhD 81 2 97.6% 24 107Susan Bloom 34 1 97.1% 72 107Tamara M. Tobias, ARNP 33 1 97.1% 73 107Alice A. Chen, PhD 63 3 95.5% 41 107Sanjay Agarwal, MD 38 2 95.0% 69 109Barbara Collura 40 3 93.0% 64 107Atlee Breland 37 3 92.5% 67 107Carol N. Lesser, NP, RNC 35 3 92.1% 69 107Renee Reijo Pera, PhD 45 4 91.8% 60 109Shalini Gunawardena, RN 32 3 91.4% 72 107Shawn Chavez, PhD 30 3 90.9% 76 109Francisco Arredondo, MD 66 7 90.4% 34 107Santiago Munne, PhD 68 8 89.5% 31 107Mark Wossidlo, PhD 27 4 87.1% 78 109Vipul Patel, MD, FACS 38 6 86.4% 63 107Sherman J. Silber, MD 74 12 86.0% 21 107Sejal D. Patel, MD 39 8 83.0% 60 107Kirsten Hurder-Karchmer, LAc 45 14 76.3% 48 107

2013 PCRS Program Evaluation - Faculty Ranking

Would you be interested in hearing this speaker again at a future PCRS activity?


Results Analysis: PCRS uses multiple sources of data to identify practice gaps and assess needs including:

• Evaluations of previous PCRS CME activities • Anecdotal comments from meeting participants and society members • Expert and peer input • New technology developments

• Pre and post activity surveys

Our 2013 Program Chair LaTasha Craig, MD and 2013 President Paul Magarelli, MD, PhD are recognized experts in the field of Reproductive Medicine. Based on their review of the data collected from the sources above, the following practice gaps have been identified:

• New Technologies and Regulatory Law Changing technologies in medicine coupled with evolving regulatory law require physicians and other members of the reproductive healthcare team to constantly seek out educational opportunities to stay current in this rapidly advancing field.

• Interactive Team Approach In the rapidly advancing field of reproductive medicine, provision of optimal care for patients demands a comprehensive treatment plan that requires input and participation from a healthy and effective medical team. Traditional CME activities often fail to provide educational opportunities designed to teach team members from various professional backgrounds at the same time, thus missing the chance to “build in” an interactive team approach during the learning process.

Our analysis of the data collected during the evaluation of the 2012 Annual Meeting identified the following items to be addressed in future activity planning. Changes implemented for the 2013 meeting are detailed in Blue.

• Attendee comments documented in the open ended text questions included a request for more time devoted to Q&A. Future Program Chairs and planners will be encouraged to schedule Q&A time and work with faculty to stay on schedule. Program schedules were prepared with specific time slots at the end of each presentation for Q&A. This scheduling technique ensured

appropriate time was allowed during each session for audience participation.

• Attendee comments documented in the open ended text questions included a request for more audience participation using the remote audience response system. Future faculty will be encouraged to expand the use of the audience response system. Use of an audience response system was expanded to include all sessions of the meeting.

• Several comments on the debates reflected a need for participants to actively defend a point a view, specifically designated to take either the “pro” or “con” position.

Future Program Chairs and planners will be encouraged to structure the debates in a more traditional format. The 2013 program schedule included the debate “Will PGS Become a Part of Every IVF Cycle in the Near Future?” with Santiago Munne, PhD and Z. Peter Nagy, MD, PhD taking opposite views on the topic. A survey of the participants indicated that 98.6% felt there was a “balanced view of therapeutic options” and 100.0% agreed the session met the stated objectives.

Our analysis of the data collected during the evaluation of the 2013 Annual Meeting identified the following items to be addressed in future activity planning:

• Attendee comments documented in the open ended text questions included several requests for more basic science. Future Program Chairs and planners will be encouraged to ensure the program structure includes an appropriate balance of basic science.

• Increase time allotted to nursing topics. 32% of the attendees in the 2013 nursing session were practicing physicians, indicating an encouraging trend in the team approach to patient care. Future Program Chairs and planners will be encouraged to include sessions directed towards various members of the reproductive medical health care teams with the idea in mind that all members of the team, regardless of professional status, should find educational value.

• A suggestion submitted in response to the question on how the meeting might be improved was “hot topics . . . should be put at prime times.” This statement inspired us to analysis the attendance data by time slot to identify our learners “prime time.” The chart below indicates that sessions identified by future planners as “hot topics” should be scheduled in the 9:00 AM to 10:00 AM time slot when possible.

Strongly Disagree

Disagree Undecided AgreeStrongly Agree

N/ARating

AverageResponse

Count0 0 0 50 59 3 4.60 112

1040

Strongly Disagree


N/ARating

AverageResponse

Count0 0 0 47 64 1 4.48 112

1040

Strongly Disagree


N/ARating

AverageResponse

Count0 0 6 52 47 7 4.39 112

1040

Answer Options

Check oneanswered question

skipped question

As a result of attending the PCRS 2013 program I have gained knowldge/practical skills/experiences that will increase my competence.

Answer Options

Check Oneanswered question

skipped question

As a result of attending the PCRS 2013 program I have gained knowledge/practical skills/experiences that will improve patient outcomes.

2013 PCRS Program Evaluation - Overall Program

skipped question

As a result of attending the PCRS 2013 program I have gained knowledge/practical skills/experiences that will improve my performace.

Answer Options

Check oneanswered question

0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00

Performance

Competence

Improve Patient Outcome

Knowledge / Practical Skills / Experiene GainedPCRS 2013 Annual Meeting


Please indicate any changes you plan to make in your practice as a result of information you received from the sessions and lectures you attended at this meeting that will enhance the care and well-being of your patients:Consider closer Prog monitoring in IVF stim cyclesProvide additional patient education

1. Change protocol for when to start progesterone for FET cycles. 2. Hope to institute overall staff/management changes that will enhance the patient experience in our office.May look at scratch test for endometrial receptivity.Employ PGS more routinely, use IM progesterone for FET, add more hMG to procols from day 1.Will update my male evaluation.Use of AMHIncrease single embryo transfer in natural cyclesHow to improve patient experience in officeWe may move toward more frozen embryo transfers in order for the patient's uterus to have the optimal lining to receive an embryo.Endometrial preparationOverall scope of IVF centers future has changed especially with the talks of dealing with data differently to aid in patient diagnosisProgesterone start delay for vaginal vs. IMTools to improve customer service and patient experiencesBE MORE AWARE OF PROTOCOLS AND WHY THEY ARE CHOSENMore freeze all cycles and PGSDr Arredondos lecture- wow! I will be thinking about this daily!Egg freezing techniquesBetter knowledge base for male infertility work up, gained insight into methods fornimprovingboffice environment and delivery of careRefer more patients for work up for the malesEmployee training to coordinate effort to provide "experience" for patients.No crinoneI am a postdoctoral fellow and doing basic research - so this question does not apply to meI will focus on some of the emerging technologies and see how I can incorporate them into my practiceWill probably freeze all embryos from Lupron trigger cycles unless embryos being transferred to egg recipientEducation is powerful.Patient involvement in new clinic set up. Evaluation of the male fertility patients.I recieved valuable knowldge on how to counsel patients regarding weight loss/stress reduction and fertility. Use of progesterone in ART cycles and transforming patient experience.Discuss meeting content with rest of my team.Better personal knowledge with which to inform and counsel patients.Counseling and care of patientsExcellent program and speakers.I am more knowledgable about new technologies under investigation to assist in embryo selection, allowing me to better counsel my patients.Potential Freeze-allIncreased awareness of BMI and poor pregnancy outcomeWhen doing fresh PGS, transfer biopsied blastocysts by noon on day 6 to maintain highest IR.I plan to change the names of the procedures used based off Paco's lecture.

I will consider doing freeze all cycles with frozen embryo transfer in subsequent cycles for more of my patientsIncrease use of PGS, freeze-all with later FET.Am not currently practicingStill thinking about all the exciting new informationSocial media, use of progestereone PIO vs vaginal, How to treat patient's using good customer service. Antagonist in the use of donor's. Acupuncture in treatmentSocial media and Patient satisfaction and awarenessWill review with our physician to see if delaying vaginal support in cryo cycles could improve outcome. Encourage more patients to move to freeze IVF cycles to let lining calm down.Luteal phase supplementationWill counsel more patients for single embryo transfers because FET pregnancy rates are very goodI am now more informed regarding the availability of oocyte cryopreservation as an option that I did not previously discuss with patients.Lighter stim. Earlier retrieval. CCS.I will make every effort to acknowledge the patients with their names at least 3 times per visit as recommended by Dr. "Paco".Change my vitrification method.Will use knowledge learned to further educate my patientsBetter counselinng re optionsUse of array CGH for PGS and POC karyotypeBetter knowledge for patient counseling.Initiate some "freeze all" cycles. More liberal use of agonist triggers.Thinking about endometrial scratchingAddress stress better, consider endometrial receptivity assay, advances in pgdImprove my office delivery of pt care based on the experience economyPatient focused care was eye openingDo more all freeze cycles. Do mopre PGS with all freeze and SET.Move toward using vaginal progesteroneMore social media, AcupunctureSocial mediaSocial mediaCounseling about options


How do you think these changes will affect patient outcomes?

Help eliminate OHSS.Make their treatments more tolerableBetter pregnany rates and fewer multiples.More infoMy outcomes are good and if anything will help my patients manage their expectations betterImproved pregnancy ratesPossibly increase pregnancy ratesI hope it makes pt's feel more at ease.Reducing stress and creating more positive environmentBetter predict success or failureHopefully better Preg ratesWith bwtter education, less frustration, happier pt1. Hopefully improve FET pregnancy rates even more! 2. Likely will not affect actual pregnancy outcomes, but hopefully will make them even happier with their overall experience.Possible increased pregnancy outcomes.Improve ART outcomesImproved diagnostics.Should improve pregnancy rates in high respondersHopefully these changes will increase our pregnancy rates.Improved pregnancy ratesBetterWe will be able to individualize treatment to patientsBetter outcomes, improved patient satisfactionHIGHER PREGNANCY OUTCOMEImprove implantation ratesImproveBetter patient satisfaction , improvement in,outcomes can be traced to better environment to deliver careGive them better information so they can make educated decisionsPerhaps reduce stress, keep patients in treatment, and improve cumulative pregnancy ratesMore success for IVF patients who overstimulateImproved outcomesMake them betterI hope that patients will have more positive experiences at our pratice and higher success rates with treatment.Personhood information in particular needs to be discussed in center.Improved awareness and hopefully better outcomes.Improve outcomes, satisfactionPotential to shift some clinical practices or add clinical research.This should improve patient satisfaction and outcomes.Potentially improve outcomes for IVFMost information provided to patientImproved pregnancy rates for patients doing PGSThis should increase implantation rate per embryo transferred, allow eSET for all, and reduce multiple pregnancies.Certainly will improve outcomesHopefully it will keep patients happy, decrease anxiety and pain and hopefully attain a family.

Patients will be happier and have better expectationsWe already have higher rates with cryo cycles recently so we will see if physician open to change. My guess is that pregnancy rates will increase. The big concern is helping patients adjust to expectations and agreeing to delay of pregnancy.Less patients will have multiplesBetter outcome. Save moneyI hope that they will feel comfortable in our program and in such keep their efforts there to the final conclusion of a healthy pregnancy.Increase frozen embryo pregnancy rates.For the betterI think they will improve the reliability of the genetic screeninghopfully positively :-)Improve PRHopefullyimprove themImprove themMore patients and thus a better practice


Please provide general comments regarding this program and suggest how it might be improved.

Did not find the acupuncture presentation appropriate for this meeting. Ditto with myomectomy��lectureMore nursing specific content. Longer nursing carve out.Set time different from coachella music festivalOne of the best over the yearsGreatNeeds to be more interactiveMore male infertilityI thought it was very well orginized.Best PCRS I have ever attendedDelightful time. Would suggest that the tickets for the Sat dinner be $50 or less. The attendee could have a higher cost if needed or make it part of registration.Get presenters to provide the slides way in advance- so that the attendees can actually have the slides for the presentationsExcellent program, increase basic info, entry level classes for new comers to the fieldThis was a great program! New information, a great variety of speakers, international crowd. I loved everything about it! Would appreciate a few more nurse specific lectures, but I enjoyed and attended everything! Excellent program, and everyone I have talked to who attended says the same!I thought this year's PCRS was great. Interesting topics and very good speakers. So glad I came!Conference was good. I was surprised that there were not any scientific sessions this year. Power cords at tables was a nice addition for those of us that use electronics. More tables to accommodate attendees.Excellent program, great exchange of clinical and scientific informationstrong emphysis on ivf stimulation protocols.I thought it was a great meeting, but I would have enjoyed more hands on embryology seminars, such as a biopsy workshop, etc.Great program. Do it again.a bit more hands on for the laboratory staff- embryologistsAs always an amazing, fun and intellectual conference - would have enjoyed more outside evening events, possibly have cocktail hour outside and then dinner inside venue for closing dinner.This is a wonderful program and the speakers/topics were excellent. Some suggestions I heard from nurses were to extend the nursing break-out to a 1/2 or full day since it felt like 2 hours was not enough time.GREAT PROGRAMRequest more basic scienceSUCH an excellent conference. Delivered a very different experience this year than last year, yet still definitely worth going. Looking forward to going back.Your program gets better and better each year.. Stem cell lecture great by Alan Trounson, day to day carevgiving does not change ,butbgreatvto understand these conceptsReally it was great, I liked how it was a bit relaxed, not a lot of concurrent sessions and plenty of time to socialize. Amazing field of medicine.I would like to have one Keynote speaker in the basic science field but otherwise it was fine!Progression from one topic to another seemed a bit disjointed.Provide a larger room so that everyone has a table to write on. Avoid a monopoly by a few of questions to the speaker.I think the conference was well organized. The hotel had provided erroneous information, they said that there were no shuttles to the hotel and only taxis had to be used when in fact, there are several shuttle services Very good program. I as a nurse would like to see a little more of the program pertain to nurses.Excellent program, congratulations. I would have like to see an "ovarian stimulation update" lecture for physicians.Increase nursing credits

Excellent. Great speakers of real quality.Great program!Great lecturers. Good flow to the conference. Great food. Started too early (and hard NOT to go to the meetings as they sounded good).Good collegialty. Cocktail welcome party spectacular venue.Most speakers seemed very rushed and skipped slides or rushed through slides too quickly to be able to understand them. Maybe they need more time to speak? Maybe the presentations need to be more targeting and not as comprehensive - although I very much appreciated that aspect of it.Clinically applicable presentations were greatI love the smaller size of this conference. For me, it makes it easier to learn and network.Excellent meeting - opportunity to meet and talk with friends.Great speakers on timely subjects. BUT, had way too much on embryo development. This isn't just a technical meeting either. Loved the soft skills of how to run a practice. Need more on the impact of Obamacare.wonderful programGreat conference. It would be great to have more nursing centered programs for both the new nurse and the experienced nurse. Maybe Q&A sessions with nurses. More CEU's for nursesThe program is ran very well from the scientific and medical aspects of the meeting. However I feel the political rants some people inject into the program are absolutely inappropriate.I truly enjoy the debates of the past and wish there had been more so that we can see both sides of the research, reasoning for difference in care. Sir Robert Edwards and Dr. Silber's talk were very similar to last year. Not sure a duplication is desiredIt was a very good program. I enjoyed it tremendously.Magnificent opportunity to learn. Grow. Develop fruendshipI think it was very good. I was disappointed that more people did not attend the Sunday Brunch lecture by Gary Taubs on obesity. Very enlightening and stimulating. If so few people stay over to Sunday maybe the meeting needs to finish on Saturday night. Also, I was happy to see that people were monitoring the entry to events to those with badges. I feel that those who do not pay to attend should not be able to just get in for free.Wonderful program. Great balance of educational and social networking sessions. Great speakers and organization of all events!GreAtThis program was top heavy with business and industry topics and light on real science. More clinical science lectures and more papers as well as less practice management and business would improve the program.best networking conference I attendedThank you for the perfect temperature in the lecture room. It's usually so cold in other conferences but not this one! Thank you for the casual environment. It's nice to mingle w various people regardless of who you are or your title. I like the smallness of the conference - it's more intimate. Excellent topics!!! I love the different speakers rather than the same old speakers one sees at other conferences. I think the conference location is excellent! I like the fact that meals were provided. This was my first time at pcrs and I really thought it was worth attending. I hope I can attend again next year.This was an outstanding program this year. It was well balanced.Very good program. Maybe too much tine on fibroids��Good mix of topicsGreat jobExcellent program - one of the bestMore nursing educationI think some of the hot topics such as social media should be put at prime times like 9 or 10 am because the number of people at 7am is very low. Also things like Accupuncture shouldn't be at prime time. Also more talks but shorter, half hour presentations vs one hour long that such go on unnecessarily

Response Percent

Response Count

100.0% 1000.0% 0

2100

12skipped question

No

Do you plan to attend future PCRS educational events?

answered question

Yes


Other (please specify)

Answer Options

Do you plan to attend future PCRS educational events?

Yes

No

Comments:I usually attend every 2 yearsMost definitely!!! and the final speaker on Sunday was great! Compelling information!

2013 PCRS Program Evaluation - Wednesday April 17

Please indicate which sessions you attended on Wednesday, April 17:

Answer Options Attended Did Not AttendResponse

Count

Fellows Session (1:00 to 4:00 PM) 19 90 109Embryology Session (1:00 to 4:00 PM) 26 83 109Morcellation (4:00 to 5:30 PM) 14 95 109

Percentage of attendees who agreed: Legend- The session: A - Was well presented B - Was valuable learning experience C - Matched my scope of current/potential professional activities D - Will influence my practice of medicine E - Presented a balanced view of therapeutic options F - Was free of commercial bias G - Met objectives t t d i

Answer Options A B C D E F GEndocrinology of Pregnancy (Sanjay Agarwal, MD) 94.7% 100.0% 94.7% 94.7% 94.7% 94.7% 94.7%Neuroendocrine Function and Disease State (Sarah L. Berga, MD)

92.3% 100.0% 96.2% 96.2% 96.2% 96.2% 96.2%

Embryos: Imaging, Genetics, & Epigenetic Evaluation (Shawn Chavez PhD; Renee Reijo Pera PhD; Mark 85 7% 85 7% 100 0% 78 6% 85 7% 92 9% 92 9%

stated in program

(Shawn Chavez, PhD; Renee Reijo Pera, PhD; Mark Wossidlo, PhD )

85.7% 85.7% 100.0% 78.6% 85.7% 92.9% 92.9%

CommentsInteresting sessionDr Berga's talk was fascinatingVery interesting presentation.E b i i d i ti t t di N d t l ti l i t th PCRS tiEmbryo imaging and epigenetics was outstanding. Need more translational science at the PCRS meeting

Yes No No OpinionResponse

Count

38 2 69 10968 0 41 109

Answer Options

S h L B MD


Sanjay Agarwal, MD

2013 PCRS Program Evaluation - Wednesday April 17

68 0 41 10930 3 76 10945 4 60 10927 4 78 109

CommentsAll great topicsMark Wossidlo presented interesting information but his accent was difficult for me to understand.

Mark Wossidlo, PhD

Sarah L. Berga, MD

Renee Reijo Pera, PhDShawn Chavez, PhD

60

70

80


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Yes No

0

10

Sanjay Agarwal, MD

Sarah L. Berga, MD

Shawn Chavez, PhD

Renee Reijo Pera, PhD

Mark Wossidlo, PhD

2013 PCRS Program Evaluation - Thursday April 18

Please indicate which sessions you attended on Thursday, April 18:


Count

Obesity & Reproduction (8:00 to 8:45 AM) 82 25 107Oral Presentation 1 to 4 (8:45 to 9:30 AM) 90 17 107Transforming Care Teams (10:10 to 12:10 AM) 76 31 107Update on Male Infertility (2:00 to 3:00 PM) 86 21 107

Answer Options A B C D E F GObesity and Reproduction (Sarah L. Berga, MD) 92.7% 98.8% 98.8% 97.6% 96.3% 98.8% 98.8%Transforming Care Teams to Provide the Best Possible 96.1% 93.4% 96.1% 93.4% 94.7% 94.7% 97.4%Update on Male Infertility (Robert Oates, MD, FACS 95.3% 98.8% 100.0% 96.5% 97.7% 96.5% 98.8%

CommentsBob was greatDid not feel the Transforming care lecture was worth the time.Need to have copies of the slides in the syllabus!Robert's lecture was one of the best!!

Percentage of attendees who agreed: Legend- The session: A - Was well presented B - Was valuable learning experience C - Matched my scope of current/potential professional activities D - Will influence my practice of medicine E - Presented a balanced view of therapeutic options F - Was free of commercial bias G - Met objectives stated in program.


Count

85 0 22 10766 7 34 107


Sarah L. Berga, MD

2013 PCRS Program Evaluation Thursday April 18

Answer Options

F i A d d MD 66 7 34 10782 0 25 107

5107

5

CommentsAll were excellent presentations! Would like to have Dr Arredondo's talk on tape to present to MY office!Dr Arredondo was fantastic! Was skeptical at first of a 2-hr lecture on this topic but the time went by so quickly! Very

Comments

skipped question

Robert Oates, MD, FACS

answered question

Francisco Arredondo, MD

Dr. Arredondo's talk was the best lecture of the whole meeting. Congratulations!I liked hearing Arredondo but would not want to hear him again in the near futureLOVED THE UROLOGY LECTURE!

Dr. Arredondo was fantastic! Was skeptical at first of a 2-hr lecture on this topic, but the time went by so quickly! Very interesting and entertaining.


40

50

60

70

80

90

Yes No

0

10

20

30

40

50

Sarah L. Berga, MD Francisco Arredondo, MD Robert Oates, MD, FACS

Yes No

Sarah L. Berga, MD Francisco Arredondo, MD Robert Oates, MD, FACS

2013 PCRS Program Evaluation - Friday April 19

Please indicate which sessions you attended on Friday, April 19:


CountBlending of Western and Eastern Medicine in Reproductive Therapies (8:00 to 8:45 AM)

79 28 107

Endometrial Receptivity/Implantation (8:45 to 9:30 AM)97 10 107

Oral Presentation of Papers 1, 5, 6, 7, and 9 (10:15 to 11:15 AM)

95 12 107

Oogenesis Update (11:15 to 12:00 Noon) 88 19 107The Future of Assisted Reproduction: Innovation, Setbacks and Speed of Progress (12:00 Noon to 1:00 PM)

81 26 107

PGD/PGS (1:45 to 3:20 PM) 86 21 107Embryo Development and Aneuploidy: Practical Application of time-Lapse Imaging and Time-Lapse Markers

85 22 107

Debate - Will PGS Become a Part of Every IVF Cycle in the Near Future?

74 33 107

Embryonic Development of Oocytes (3:20 to 4:15 PM)72 35 107

Answer Options A B C D E F GBlending of Western and Eastern Medicine in Reproductive Therapies (Francisco Arredondo, MD and Kirsten Hurder-Karchmer, LAc)

93.7% 91.1% 93.7% 89.9% 89.9% 93.7% 94.9%

Endometrial Receptivity/Implantation (Catherine Racowsky, PhD, HCLD)

96.9% 99.0% 97.9% 97.9% 96.9% 96.9% 96.9%

Oogenesis Update (Sherman J. Silber, MD) 97.7% 96.6% 97.7% 93.2% 93.2% 98.9% 96.6%The Future of Assisted Reproduction: Innovation, Setbacks and Speed of Progress (Jacques Cohen, PhD)

97.5% 97.5% 98.8% 97.5% 97.5% 100.0% 96.3%

PGD/PGS (Santiago Munne, PhD) 97.7% 96.5% 98.8% 97.7% 95.3% 95.3% 95.3%Embryo Development and Aneuploidy: Practical Application of time-Lapse Imaging and Time-Lapse Markers (Alice A. Chen, PhD)

98.8% 97.6% 96.5% 95.3% 94.1% 95.3% 97.6%

Debate - Will PGS Become a Part of Every IVF Cycle in the Near Future? (Santiago Munne, PhD and Z. Peter Nagy, MD, PhD)

97.3% 98.6% 100.0% 98.6% 97.3% 95.9% 100.0%

Embryonic Development of Oocytes (Z. Peter Nagy, MD, PhD)

100.0% 97.2% 98.6% 97.2% 94.4% 98.6% 98.6%

CommentsReally enjoyed oral #1 :)GOOD PRESENTATIONSDebate was not really a contested debate. Endometrial receptivity talk was well researched. PGD/PGS was a power point purgatory.

Percentage of attendees who agreed: The session: A - Was well presented B - Was a valuable learning experience C - Matched my scope of current/potential professional activities D - Will influence my practice of medicine E - Presented a balanced view of therapeutic options F - Was free of commercial bias G - Met objectives stated in program.


Count

66 11 30 10745 14 48 107

2013 PCRS Program Evaluation - Friday April 19

Answer Options

Ki t H d K h LA


Francisco Arredondo, MD45 14 48 10795 1 11 10774 12 21 10781 2 24 10776 9 22 10763 3 41 10768 8 31 10780 1 26 107

Catherine Racowsky, PhD, HCLD

Santiago Munne, PhD

Jacques Cohen, PhD

Kirsten Hurder-Karchmer, LAc

Alice A. Chen, PhD

Sherman J. Silber, MD

Z. Peter Nagy, MD, PhD

Santiago Munne, PhD

CommentsArredondo's talk was pure money grabbing and embarassingCatherine and Peter are wonderful speakers with a lot of good information!!Debate could have been better with more audience questions.


YesNo

60

80

100

120

YesNo

0

20

40

60

cisc

o nd

o, M

D

Hur

der-

er, L

Ac

ther

ine

cow

sky,

, H

CLD

rman

J.

ber,

MD

cque

s en

, PhD

ntia

go

ne, P

hD

A. C

hen,

hD nt

iago

ne

, PhD

er N

agy,

P

hD

Fra

ncis

co

Arr

edon

do, M

Kirs

ten

Hur

deK

arch

mer

, LA

Cat

herin

e R

acow

sky

P

hD, H

CL

She

rman

JS

ilber

, MD

Jacq

ues

Coh

en, P

h

San

tiago

M

unne

, Ph

Alic

e A

. Che

nP

hD

San

tiago

M

unne

, Ph

Z. P

eter

Nag

yM

D, P

hD

2013 PCRS Program Evaluation - Saturday April 20

Please indicate which sessions you attended on Saturday, April 20:


CountFellows’ Breakfast - The New Era of Patient Centric Approaches to ART (7:00 to 8:00 AM)

20 87 107

How to Grow Your Practice Using Social Media (7:00 to 8:00 AM)

49 58 107

Nurses Concurrent Session (8:00 to 10:00 AM) 25 82 107Embryology Concurrent Session (8:00 to 10:00 AM) 34 73 107Physicians Concurrent Session (8:00 to 10:00 AM) 34 73 107Legally Speaking: Update on Personhood and Other Legal Battles (10:30 to 11:30 AM)

65 42 107

Translational Medicine/ Stem Cells (11:30 to 12:30 PM)65 42 107

Answer Options A B C D E F GHow to Grow Your Practice Using Social Media (Susan Bloom)

93.9% 91.8% 95.9% 95.9% 98.0% 98.0% 98.0%

Nurses Concurrent Session (Carol B. Lesser, NP, RNC; Shalini Gunawardena, RN; and Tamara M. Tobias, ARNP)

96.0% 100.0% 100.0% 96.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Embryology Concurrent Session (Z. Peter Nagy, MD, PhD and Catherine Racowsky, PhD, HCLD)

91.2% 100.0% 100.0% 97.1% 100.0% 97.1% 97.1%

Physicians Concurrent Session (Sejal D. Patel, MD and Vipul Patel, MD, FACS)

97.1% 94.1% 100.0% 97.1% 100.0% 94.1% 97.1%

Legally Speaking: Update on Personhood and Other Legal Battles (Atlee Breland; Sean B. Tipton; and Barbara Collura)

95.4% 98.5% 100.0% 96.9% 100.0% 98.5% 100.0%

Translational Medicine/ Stem Cells (Alan O. Trounson, PhD)

96.9% 98.5% 96.9% 96.9% 100.0% 100.0% 98.5%

CommentsPhysicians Session, Legally Speaking, and Translational Medicine were great talks

Percentage of attendees who agreed: Legend- This session: A - Was well Presented B - Was a valuable learning experience C - Matched my scope of current/potential professional activities D - Will influence my practice of medicine E - Presented a balanced view of therapeutic options F - Was free of commercial bias G - Met objectives stated in program.


Count

34 1 72 107

2013 PCRS Program Evaluation

Answer Options


Susan Bloom35 3 69 10732 3 72 10733 1 73 10768 0 39 10778 1 28 10739 8 60 10738 6 63 10737 3 67 107

Shalini Gunawardena, RN

Vipul Patel, MD, FACS

Z. Peter Nagy, MD, PhD

Carol B. Lesser, NP, RNC

Sejal D. Patel, MD

Tamara M. Tobias, ARNP

Atlee Breland

Catherine Racowsky, PhD, HCLD

46 1 60 10740 3 64 10766 0 41 107

Comments

Trounson gave a GREAT talk- would love to get updates on this area of research/clinical progress

Personhood talks were heavily biased and not helpful for the general attendee. A legal discussion of case studies would have been more helpful

Barbara ColluraSean B. Tipton

Alan O. Trounson, PhD

g g p p gTrounson was greatI think it good to vary speakers.Great nursing session. Wish there were more nursing sessions.Alan Trounson's talk was one of the highlights of the meeting!Alan's lecture was amazing!


5060708090


Yes No

0102030405060

Blo

om

es

ser,

N

C ni

rden

a,

a M

. A

RN

P

Nag

y,

PhD ne

P

hD,

D el, M

D

l, M

D,

S

re

land

Tip

ton

Col

lura

unso

n,

Sus

an B

loom

Car

ol B

. Les

ser,

N

P, R

NC

Sha

lini

Gun

awar

dena

, R

N

Tam

ara

M.

Tob

ias,

AR

NP

Z. P

eter

Nag

y,

MD

, PhD

Cat

herin

e R

acow

sky,

PhD

, H

CLD

Sej

al D

. Pat

el, M

D

Vip

ul P

atel

, MD

, F

AC

S

Atle

e B

rela

nd

Sea

n B

. Tip

ton

Bar

bara

Col

lura

Ala

n O

. Tro

unso

n,

PhD

Percentage with Correct Response

Pre Test Post Test Change

a. 30%, 70% and 1% 39.6% 6.7%

b. 1%, 30% and 70% 2.1% 0.0%

Correct c. 70%, 30% and 1% 52.1% 93.3% 41.2%

d. 70%, 1% and 30% 6.3% 0.0%

a. To ensure proper fertilization of the oocyte by the sperm 12.5% 6.7%

Correct b. To correct genetic mutations such as single point mutations 25.0% 53.3% 28.3%

c. To initiate the cell cycle for embryogenesis 12.5% 13.3%

d. To erase epi mutations and establish toti- and pluripotency 50.0% 46.7%

a. The human embryo DOES NOT rely on maternal RNA and protein until Day 3. 12.5% 20.0%

Correct b. The first lineage to be specified during development is the trophectoderm. 43.8% 46.7% 2.9%

c. The centrosome for the first mitotic division(s) is maternally inherited in human embryos. 41.7% 33.3%

d. Maternal contribution to embryonic aneuploidy DOES NOT increase with maternal age. 2.1% 0.0%

Embryos: Imaging, Genetics & Epigenetic Evaluation?

What are the approximate percentages of aneuploidy (abnormalities in chromosome number) in human, bovine and mouse embryos at the cleavage-stage in that order?

Why does mammalian development require epigenetic reprogramming?

Which of the following is TRUE?



Correct Yes 55.2% 100.0% 44.8%

No 21.9% 0.0%

Not sure 22.9% 0.0%

Correct Yes 28.6% 94.3% 65.7%

No 38.1% 0.0%

Not sure 33.3% 5.7%

Can you explain how obesity can lead to multiple metabolic derangements that affect many aspects of the body including development of diabetes, high cholesterol, and heart disease?

Do you understand the interaction between the brain-gut axis, satiety, obesity, stress, and reproduction?

Obesity and Reproduction



a. Relational Problems 6.8% 8.3%

b. Health Problems 1.4% 2.1%

c. Rejected IVF 4.1% 0.0%

Correct d. Emotional Distress 83.6% 87.5% 3.9%

e. Age 4.1% 2.1%

a. The five steps to design a memorable experience are: Theme Experience, Harmonize (+cues), Eliminate (-cues), Mix in Memorabilia and Engage 5 senses.

5.5% 6.3%

Correct b. 85% of the medicine practiced has robust medical data. 61.6% 79.2% 17.6%

c. The four realms of a customer experience are: Entertainment, Educational, Escapist and Esthetic.

17.8% 21.1%

d. The four aspects of a balanced scorecard are: Financial Health, Customer Experience, Employee Satisfaction and Internal Business Operations (productivity).

15.1% 12.5%

Transforming Care Teams to Provide the Best Possible Patient-Centered, Collaborative Care

What is the most common reason for a patient to drop out of infertility care?

Which of the following statements is FALSE?



A. Estrogen 1.1% 0.0%

B. Progesterone 0.0% 0.0%

C. Sex hormone binding globulin 0.0% 0.0%

Correct D. Testosterone 97.9% 100.0% 2.1%

E. Prolactin 1.1% 0.0%

A. AZFc microdeletion 3.2% 0.0%

B. Epididymal blockage 28.7% 25.0%

C. Anabolic steroid use 12.8% 8.9%

Correct D. Congenital bilateral absence of the vas deferens 47.9% 64.3% 16.4%

E. Varicocele induced azoospermia 7.4% 1.8%


A. Yes 23.4% 21.4%

B. No 27.7% 17.9%

Correct C. Not sure 48.9% 60.7% 11.8%

A. Increased seminal fluid glucose 16.0% 19.6%

B. Impaired sperm membrane insulin receptors 16.0% 10.7%

Correct C. Impaired vasal peristalsis 13.8% 37.5% 23.7%

D. Increased seminal fluid leptin levels 7.4% 5.4%

E. Impaired sperm mitochondrial activity due to impaired glycolysis 46.8% 26.8%

Update on Male Infertility

What is the hormone responsible for libido and sexuality?

A 26 year old azoospermic male with 0.7cc / pH 6.5. What is the most likely diagnosis?

Should we harvest testis tissue from an adolescent KS male in order to “Preserve Fertility” for his future?

A 33 year old insulin dependent diabetic has a semen analysis showing: 1.2cc 16 x106/cc 1% motility (grade 1) The reason for these findings is:



Correct True 89.7% 98.0% 8.3%

False 10.3% 0.0%

a. Is used in place of conventional medicine 1.1% 0.0%

b. Employs strategies with or without demonstrated evidence 16.1% 23.5%

Correct c. Is dependent upon the relationship between the patient and the doctor. 23.0% 27.5% 4.5%

d. all of the above. 59.8% 49.0%

Blending of Western and Eastern Medicine in Reproductive Therapies

Acupuncture has been demonstrated in some studies to improve IVF outcomes.

The philosophy of IM and its whole person approach is designed to treat the person, not just the disease



Yes 29.2% 19.3%

Correct No 70.8% 80.7% 9.9%

Yes 8.3% 5.3%

Correct No 91.7% 94.7% 3.0%

Yes 18.8% 14.0%

Correct No 81.3% 86.0% 4.7%

Should fresh transfers in all IVF cycles be replaced by elective freeze-alls?

Endometrial Receptivity/Implantation

Is the nomenclature used for describing the phases of the endometrial cycle the same as that used for describing the phases of the menstrual cycle ?

Has a single biomarker of endometrial receptivity been identified ?



Correct 1. Palindromic unsequenced regions in X chromosome similar to the Y. 43.5% 57.4% 13.9%

2. Two Y chromosomes XYY inhibits oogenesis. 21.7% 7.4%

3. Too many X chromosomes (XXX or XXXX) inhibits spermatogenesis. 17.4% 24.1%

4. Oogenesis genes are concentrated on the Y chromosome. 17.4% 11.1%

1. Very robust. Works almost all the time. 0.0% 18.5%

2. Rarely works. 17.4% 1.9%

3. Depends on donor ovary ovarian reserve. 52.2% 42.6%

Correct 4. Two are correct and one is incorrect. 30.4% 37.0% 6.6%

Oogenesis Update

How is Y chromosome related to oogenesis? What is correct?

How robust a technique is ovary transplantation?



Correct True 31.6% 66.7% 35.1%

False 68.4% 33.3%

Correct 0.24% (74 of 30900 million) 55.1% 55.6% 0.5%

0.54% (168 of 30900 million) 18.4% 24.4%

2.40% (742 of 30900 million) 9.2% 4.4%

5.40% (1680 of 30900 million) 2.0% 4.4%

None of the above 15.3% 11.1%

The Future of Assisted Reproduction: Innovation, Setbacks and Speed of Progress

Using a mathematical approach to calculate the speed of innovation and historical SART data for USA National implantation rates for <35 years, this group will reach 100% by 2064.

What percentage of the 2012 NIH budget was allocated for support of infertility?



a. Ensuring embryo culture and light exposure safety using time-lapse microscopy. 2.0% 3.9%

b. Defining and validating predictive parameters using evidence-based data. 5.1% 9.8%

c. Processing abundant imaging data in real-time. 8.1% 0.0%

d. Fitting time-lapse microscopy instrumentation into current laboratory settings without significant work flow interruption and expense.

5.1% 0.0%

Correct e. All of the above. 79.8% 86.3% 6.5%

1. a, c and e 11.1% 7.8%

2. b, c and f 8.1% 9.8%

Correct 3. c, e and f 33.3% 47.1% 13.8%

4. a, b and e 11.1% 7.8%

5. b, d and e 36.4% 27.5%

PGD/PGS

The challenges of applying time-lapse microscopy parameters in everyday IVF practice include all of the following, except:

Which early developmental parameters, measured by Day 3, predict success or failure of human embryo development to the blastocyst stage: a. Time to PN breakdown b. Observable polar body c. Duration of first cytokinesis d. Time to 1st cleavage (appearance of 2nd cell) e. Duration of 1st cell cycle (2 to 3 cell) f. Synchrony of 2nd and 3rd cell cycles (3 to 4 cell)



Yes 15.0% 17.4%

Correct No 85.0% 82.6% -2.4%

True 33.8% 28.3%

Correct False 66.3% 71.7% 5.4%

True 46.3% 43.5%

Correct False 53.8% 56.5% 2.7%

Embryonic Development of Oocytes

Is vitrification of oocytes currently regarded as “experimental procedure”?

FDA regulation for cryopreserved oocyte donation applies differently than for fresh oocyte donation.

Cryostorage conditions of vitrified oocytes is similar to slow-frozen oocytes (or embryos)

Percentage with Correct Response Percentage with Correct Response Percentage with Correct Response

All Pre & Post Tests SubmittedResults from Attendees Completing

both Pre & Post TestsNon MD

Pre Test Post Test Change Pre Test Post Test Change Pre Test Post Test Change

True 14.3% 29.4% 8.3% 8.3% 5.6% 7.7%

Correct False 85.7% 70.6% -15.1% 91.7% 91.7% 0.0% 94.4% 92.3% -2.1%

1. Decrease or absent GnRH pulses 7.1% 0.0% 8.3% 0.0% 5.6% 0.0%

2. Absent mid cycle LH surge 14.3% 11.8% 25.0% 16.7% 22.2% 15.4%

3. Low serum estrogen levels 3.6% 5.9% 8.3% 8.3% 5.6% 7.7%

Correct 4. Often will bleed in response to Progesterone 64.3% 58.8% -5.5% 41.7% 50.0% 8.3% 55.6% 53.8% -1.7%

5. Normal or low normal FSH and LH levels 10.7% 23.5% 16.7% 25.0% 11.1% 23.1%

1.Oocyte cryopreservation 3.6% 23.5% 8.3% 33.3% 5.6% 23.1%

Correct 2.Ovarian tissue cryopreservation 78.6% 70.6% -8.0% 75.0% 58.3% -16.7% 66.7% 69.2% 2.6%

3.GnRH analog treatment 10.7% 5.9% 8.3% 8.3% 16.7% 7.7%

4.PGD for cancer mutations 7.1% 0.0% 8.3% 0.0% 11.1% 0.0%

1. Increase IVF success rates 3.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2. Prevent premature ovulation 14.3% 5.9% 16.7% 0.0% 16.7% 0.0%

3. Block the LH surge 7.1% 0.0% 16.7% 0.0% 11.1% 0.0%

Correct 4. All of the above 75.0% 94.1% 19.1% 66.7% 100.0% 33.3% 72.2% 100.0% 27.8%

1. long agonist protocol 7.1% 11.8% 0.0% 16.7% 0.0% 15.4%

2. any protocol with the addition of cabergoline 0.0% 5.9% 0.0% 8.3% 0.0% 7.7%

3. mini IVF 7.1% 5.9% 0.0% 8.3% 5.6% 7.7%

4. prolonged oral contraceptive suppression before starting gonadotropins 3.6% 5.9% 0.0% 8.3% 5.6% 7.7%

Correct 5. luteal estrogen, antagonist and moderate to high gonadotropin doses 82.1% 70.6% -11.5% 100.0% 58.3% -41.7% 88.9% 61.5% -27.4%

Growth Hormone is:

Nurses Session - Stimulation Protocols, Trigger Protocols and Luteal Phase Support, and Protocols for Special Needs Patients

GnRH agonist trigger for final oocyte maturation is an acceptable trigger option for all patients.

Characteristics of hypothalamic amenorrhea include all of the following except:

Which of the following fertility preservation options is available to prepubertal girls?

The purpose of pituitary down regulation is to:

The best approach for treating the low responder among the choices listed below is:

1. FDA approved for use in ART 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2. Readily available by prescription nationwide 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Correct 3. Suggested as useful for treatment of the low responder 78.6% 94.1% 15.5% 66.7% 100.0% 33.3% 72.2% 100.0% 27.8%

4. Recommended to decrease the risk of OHSS 3.6% 0.0% 8.3% 0.0% 5.6% 0.0%

5. An economical alternative to other approaches to improve follicular sensitivity to FSH stimulation

17.9% 5.9% 25.0% 0.0% 22.2% 0.0%

1. OHSS prevention 10.7% 23.5% 16.7% 33.3% 11.1% 30.8%

2. Controlling the number of smaller submature follicles 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

3. Keeping E2 in a reasonable range so that the endometrium is not adversely affected 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

4. Best served by avoiding a full dose hCG trigger 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Correct 5. All of the above 89.3% 76.5% -12.8% 83.3% 66.7% -16.7% 88.9% 69.2% -19.7%

1. B only 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Correct 2. A and B 82.1% 76.5% -5.6% 91.7% 83.3% -8.3% 83.3% 76.9% -6.4%

3. A and D 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

4. All of the above 17.9% 23.5% 8.3% 16.7% 16.7% 23.1%

Correct True 85.7% 100.0% 14.3% 100.0% 100.0% 0.0% 88.9% 100.0% 11.1%

False 14.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

1. A, B and C 25.0% 0.0% 16.7% 0.0% 27.8% 0.0%

2. B and D 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

3. A, C and D 3.6% 5.9% 0.0% 8.3% 0.0% 7.7%

Correct 4. All of the above 71.4% 94.1% 22.7% 83.3% 91.7% 8.4% 72.2% 92.3% 20.1%

The challenge in treating the hyperresponder is:

LH surge is triggered by the pituitary, in response to: a. Elevated serum estradiol b. Increasing follicular size c. Increased FSH levels d. Decreasing progesterone levels

An adverse effect of using HCG for trigger is that it places a patient at risk for developing OHSS due to its long half-life and sustained potency compared to a natural LH surge.

Possible reasons for choosing to electively freeze all embryos include: a. Improved laboratory techniques b. Increased use of embryo screening c. Optimize uterine environment d. Reducing high order multiples



Correct Yes 69.0% 76.0% 7.0%

No 15.5% 20.0%

Not Sure 15.5% 4.0%

Correct Yes 96.6% 100.0% 3.4%

No 0.0% 0.0%

Not Sure 3.4% 0.0%

Physicians Session - To Operate or Not? And The Future of Surgery

Are there research findings to help determine if the fibroids should be removed surgically prior to conception or in vitro fertilization?

Does the location of a fibroid help you determine treatment?



True 50.0% 74.1%

Correct False 50.0% 28.6% -21.4%

Yes 10.0% 28.6%

Correct No 90.0% 71.4% -18.6%

Yes 40.0% 57.1%

Correct No 60.0% 42.9% -17.1%

Correct True 50.0% 85.7% 35.7%

False 50.0% 14.3%

Embryology Session - Current Hot Topics in the Lab

Vitrification is now the universally accepted method of choice for cryopreservation of oocytes and embryos in ART?

Is time-lapse imaging of embryos the first-line method for selecting embryos for transfer?

Should elective single embryo transfer be applied for all IVF/ICSI patients ?

Trophectoderm biopsy involves removal of a smaller proportion of the embryo than day 3 biopsy.



a. make all forms of ART illegal 9.2% 8.8%

b. make all forms of contraception illegal 1.5% 0.0%

c. not have much impact on reproductive medicine 6.2% 0.0%

Correct d. endanger some common practices in our field 83.1% 91.2% 8.1%

True 66.2% 52.9%

Correct False 33.8% 47.1% 13.3%

a. No need to do anything, has not passed anywhere yet 3.1% 0.0%

b. We can count on Planned Parenhood and the ACLU to defeat it 1.5% 0.0%

c. We can count on state medical societies to defeat it 0.0% 0.0%

Correct d. Will require a coordinated effort from reproductive health professionals, patients and other groups

95.4% 100.0% 4.6%

Legally Speaking: Update on Personhood and Other Legal Battles

Most of the "personhood" legislation that has been introduced would

"Personhood" legislation has only appeared in a handful of states

In order to defeat "personhood" legislation



Yes 38.8% 30.3%

Correct No 61.2% 69.7% 8.5%

True 59.7% 39.4%

Correct False 40.3% 60.6% 20.3%

a. Macular degeneration (age related blindness) 16.4% 6.1%

b. Type I diabetes 23.9% 6.1%

Correct c. Parkinson’s Disease 16.4% 24.2% 7.8%

d. HIV/AIDS 55.2% 30.3%

e. Thalassemia 29.9% 36.4%

Correct f. Alzheimer’s Disease 19.4% 42.4% 23.0%

a. Sperm but not oocytes can be generated using induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs)from ad 26.9% 0.0%

b. Sperm and oocytes can be generated iPSCS but not live young 31.3% 27.3%

Correct c. Live young that are capable of normal breeding can be generated from oocytes using iPSCs f 16.4% 54.5% 38.1%

d. Neither functional sperm nor oocytes can be generated using iPSCs 25.4% 18.2%

Translational Medicine/ Stem Cells

Is stem cell research dependent on the donation of spare left-over IVF embryos from patients completing their ART treatments?

Human oocytes are needed for deriving somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) embryos for immune-compatible embryonic cells for eventual transplantation to patients.

Stem cell research is entering clinical trials for: (select the wrong answers)

Research in animals models has shown that:

the future of reproductive medicine: creating a health ... evaluation report.pdf · physician’s...

Documents