Loading

Annals of Nursing and Practice

Perception and Willingness of Nurses in Nigeria towards Utilization of Assisted Reproductive Technologies

Research Article | Open Access | Volume 11 | Issue 1

  • 1. Department of Maternal and Child Health Nursing, Faculty of Nursing, College of Medicine, University of Ibadan, Nigeria.
  • 2. Institute of Nursing Research, Osogbo, Osun State, Nigeria
  • 3. The Nethersole School of Nursing, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China
+ Show More - Show Less
Corresponding Authors
Margaret O Akinwaare, Department of Maternal and Child Health Nursing, Faculty of Nursing, College of Medicine, University of Ibadan, Nigeria.
ABSTRACT

Background: Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ARTs) comprise a set of diverse interventions that have been developed to remedy the burden of infertility across the world. Understanding how health professionals perceive this concept is crucial to improving its wide acceptance and utilization amongst the populace without bias. Also, due to the limited literature available on this concept in the Sub-Saharan African region, this study was designed to understand the perception and willingness toward using ARTs by nurses at a tertiary hospital in Ibadan, Nigeria.

Methods: The study adopted a descriptive cross-sectional research design, and self-structured questionnaires were used to gather data from female nurses in Adeoyo Maternity Teaching Hospital Yemetu, Ibadan. A convenience sampling technique was used to select 114 participants; 100 questionnaires were retrieved and analyzed. Analysis of data was done using descriptive statistics and the Chi-square test.

Results: The research revealed a positive perception of majority of the respondents towards ARTs. It was also observed that majority of the respondents were negatively inclined towards utilizing third-party ART techniques. The study further revealed that access to information, religion, and lack of interest, amongst other factors, strongly influenced their perception and that there was no significant relationship between the level of education of the female nurses and their willingness to utilize ARTs.

Conclusion: Effective enlightenment programs are necessary to ensure that ARTs have a wider reach. Hence, the board of nursing and education boards should ensure the inclusion of ARTs in continuing education programs and school curriculums for nurses.

KEYWORDS

Nurses; Utilization; Infertility; Reproductive Health; Technology.

ABBREVIATION

ARTs: Assisted Reproductive Technologies.

INTRODUCTION

Infertility is a major reproductive health issue affecting a noteworthy proportion of people worldwide [1-3]. Its prevalence varies across different countries, with a higher occurrence in African Countries compared to the Western world, with one in every four couples in developing countries being affected [2] and Sub-Saharan Africa is among the regions with the highest occurrence of about 30-40% [1-5]. However, with the advent and progressive development of Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ARTs) over the years, the burden of infertility has been lessened by offering a chance of procreation to affected couples [6]. Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ARTs) refer to medical procedures that are used to assist reproduction. Despite this development, these techniques are yet to be widely accepted. Although some people seek ART treatments to preserve their homes and family line, others prefer not to take the option [7]. This is due to different controversies that find their roots in religious, financial and socio-cultural influences [7,8] as well as the process and ethical dilemmas [9]. All these play crucial roles in the healthcare of individuals seeking treatment [10]. Latifnejad, in a study, suggested that in delivering care to clients undergoing fertility treatments, beyond the involvement of an interdisciplinary healthcare team, these professionals should be equipped with tactics to help their clients cope in the face of social hostility and other stress-related factors [7].

Healthcare professionals are the key sources of health-related information and counseling, and as such, they stand in the best position to help clients go through the process of ARTs successfully. Hence, they should be equipped with the right knowledge and appropriate attitude towards ARTs. Although, it is unlikely that they will not be knowledgeable about the concept of ARTs, it however, does not translate to an automatic willingness to engage in the use of these technologies, as every human being is entitled to their beliefs and actions towards a particular subject matter. It is necessary to understand the perception of individuals as it would give a better understanding of their behaviours and willingness [11]. This will further translate into better healthcare delivery. Different studies with conflicting reports have been conducted in Nigeria to assess perception, awareness, utilization and bioethical issues regarding ARTs mainly across populations comprising women and couples seeking infertility treatment [6-15]. However, no previous study was found to be conducted among health professionals in this region. Due to the paucity of literature in this area, this study focuses on the perception and willingness of nurses to utilize assisted reproductive technologies, which will complement the body of knowledge available on this subject matter and proffer resolution.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Study Area, Setting and Period

The study was carried out within Adeoyo Maternity Teaching Hospital, located at Yemetu Total, Adeoyo-Oje Road, Ibadan. The hospital provides maternal and child healthcare services to people in Ibadan and its surrounding. It comprises different units, including antenatal clinic, labor ward, antenatal ward, gynecological ward, lying-in ward, children’s ward, immunization clinic, post-caesarian section ward, gynecological clinic and family planning clinic. The study was conducted from July 2021 to September 2021. A cross-sectional survey design was employed.

Source Population and Study Population

The target population for this study included all the female nurses at Adeoyo Maternity Teaching Hospital. Previous studies have described the perspectives and acceptance levels of different populations regarding ARTs, focusing on female nurses within clinics as the target population is a novel approach. It provided information about the perspectives and acceptance level among female nurses who are directly involved in care of patients, including those who used ARTs.

Sample Size Determination and Sampling Procedure

The number of nurses in the hospital was obtained as the sampling frame, which was 160. The sample size was determined using the formula by Taro Yamane (1967) formula; (n) = {N/1+N(e)2}. Where n= required sample size, N = Total number of female nurses (160) and e= degree of tolerance at 5% with an allowance of 10% non-response, yielding a sample size of 127.

Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

All female nurses working at the hospital who gave their consent to participate were included in the study, while those who were on leave and did not give their consent as also, male nurses were excluded from the study.

Data Collection Tools, Procedure

Data collection was carried out by the first author. The questionnaires were administered to available female nurses on each unit at different shifts. The data collection process lasted for about eight days to cover a good number of the respondents. A staff nurse also assisted in distributing the questionnaires to each unit, after which they were retrieved through the senior nurse on duty at the time of retrieval. The items of the questionnaire were cross-matched with the set objectives to check for validity in order to determine its alignment with the stated objectives. The questionnaire was made up of five sections; socio demographic variables (age parity, marital status amongst others), knowledge of ARTs, perception towards ARTs, willingness of nurses towards ARTs and factors influencing perception towards ARTs.

Sections C and D in the data collection instrument were presented on a Likert scale, which the respondents ticked as applied to them. The self-reported perception of nurses was graded from 4= strongly agreed; 3= agreed; 2= undecided, 1= disagree, 0= strongly disagreed, while their willingness was graded as 0= Not Likely; 1= Not Really Likely; 2= Undecided; 3= Somewhat Likely; 4= Likely. Four questions in section C were selected and the aggregate score was calculated and summed up to 16 with eight as the average mark. Scores above 8 were graded as positive perception, while scores below 8 were graded as negative perception. Likewise, five questions in section D were selected, and the aggregate score was calculated and summed up to 20 with ten as the average mark. Scores above 10 were graded as good willingness, while scores below 10 were graded as poor willingness.

Data Processing and Analysis

The data was cleared and screened for errors and completeness. Analysis was done using SPSS Version 22.0 software. Descriptive statistics of frequency counts, percentages, mean, and standard deviation were used to summarize and represent the results. The chi-square test was used to investigate whether the relationship between the level of education of the participants and their willingness to utilize ARTs is not statistically significant at p < 0.05. Lastly, the results were presented using tables, figures, and texts.

RESULTS

Sociodemographic Characteristics

Eighty-eight per cent response rate (100 responses) was recorded. The age range of the respondents showed that a higher population of the respondents was between the ages of 20-39 years, while only 29% were aged 40 and above. The parity of the respondents indicated that 54% of the respondents have a parity of at least 1. Also, there were more married participants (52%). The dominant ethnic group was Yoruba (92%), and 84 participants had within 1-20 years of clinical experience. Slightly above half of the population (55%) hold bachelor’s and postgraduate degrees. Eighty-one per cent were Christians (Table 1).

Table 1: Sociodemographic data of study participants (n = 100).

Variables

Frequency

Percentage (%)

Age range

20-29

47

47

30-39

24

24

40-49

15

15

50-59

13

13

60 and above

1

1

Parity

0

46

46

01-Feb

21

21

03-Apr

27

27

05-Jun

2

2

Above 6

4

4

Marital Status

Divorced

1

1

Married

52

52

Single

47

47

Level of Education

Degree (BSc)

50

50

Masters

4

4

PhD

1

1

RN/RM

45

45

Religion

Christianity

81

81

Islam

19

19

Ethnic Group

Hausa

2

2

Igbo

6

6

Yoruba

92

92

Perception towards Assisted Reproductive Technologies

Based on the perception score of the study, 49% of the respondents had a negative perception towards ARTs, and 51% had a positive perception. Some respondents agreed that ARTs have more benefits than hazards (65%) and that the risks associated with their use can be effectively managed (87%). Also, 84% agreed that ARTs could help most women have a baby prior to menopause. While some disagreed that children conceived through ARTs develop long-term health problems (56%), fifty-two respondents, on the other hand agreed that the cost of ARTs is expensive and cannot be recommended to anyone (Table 2.1, 2.2).

Willingness to Utilize Assisted Reproductive Technologies

Out of a hundred respondents, only 60% were likely to utilize In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) if they had difficulty with getting pregnant and 54% as well, were willing to purchase home fertility devices. However, about two-thirds of the respondents were either unwilling or undecided about other techniques, including surrogacy (64%), sperm donation from either a known (77%) or anonymous donor (71%), egg donation from a known donor (79%) and embryo donation (77%) (Table 3.1, 3.2).

Factors Influencing Perception towards Assisted Reproductive Technologies

The bar graph indicates the position of the respondents toward the factors that influence their perception of ARTs. Ninety-three respondents showed that access to more information about ART would make them more confident to talk to their patients about it. Seventy-nine respondents indicated that their religion does not permit the use of ARTs. Also, 66 respondents specified that they are unwilling to engage in any activity related to ARTs, while 67 respondents believe ARTs have become a norm in society (Figure 1).

Null Hypothesis (Ho)

 Pearson Chi-square test was used to test the null hypothesis, which states that there is no significant relationship between the level of education and willingness to utilize ARTs. Given the p-value of the null hypothesis as 0.091, which is greater than 0.05, we failed to reject the null hypothesis (Table 4).

DISCUSSION

This study assessed the female nurses' perception and willingness to utilize Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ARTs). In this study, there was a slight difference in the percentage of nurses who had a positive perception of the concept of ARTs compared to those with a negative perception. This could be attributed to a lack of interest on the part of the participants and their perceived religious restrictions, as stated among the factors influencing their perception. This is consistent with the results of a previous study which highlighted the influences of an individual’s belief systems and religion on perception [16]. It could also be inferred that there is no uniformity in the nursing field on the concept of ARTs as the responses from the participants denoted differences in their perception, which agrees with a study conducted by Queiroz, et al. which affirmed that the practice styles of nurses exhibited differences in the meanings of ARTs [17]. However, a study conducted in Nigeria reflected a positive view of ARTs by the participants with the reason that it provides a pathway for infertile couples to be fruitful [18]. Also, close to two third of the respondents in this study believed that ARTs have more benefits than hazards. This is consistent with studies conducted by Akande [19] in the southwest region of Nigeria, which established that participants viewed ARTs to be beneficial despite their poor level of unwillingness towards it and by Jimoh [13] in North-central region of Nigeria.

A shared interest was also seen in the willingness of the participants to use ARTs, with the higher population having a poor willingness towards its use. Although they seemed open to the use of IVF, the majority of the respondents in this study were not positively inclined to the use of third-party ART techniques (surrogacy and donor conception). This is similar to the results obtained from other studies [6-19]. Also, a study conducted among infertile women in Northern Nigeria showed that the participants were majorly uncertain about oocyte (64.7%) and sperm (78.7%) donation [20,21]. This suggests that individuals prefer options that encourage them to have their own genetic progeny while avoiding the ethical, legal and social issues surrounding these third-party techniques. The popularity and wide acceptance of IVF in this clime compared to the other methods also plays a huge role in the willingness of individuals to utilize it. Furthermore, individual interests could be said to be responsible for this, as a person will only be willing to do things that interest them [11]. For sentimental purposes, some individuals would go a long way to wait until they can bear their children themselves. In this part of the world, many pride themselves in the fact that they can bear children themselves. This finding differs from Okonfua’s view in the south-south region [14] and a study in the north-central region of Nigeria where 66.7% of the respondents were willing to utilize ARTs [13]. Also, a review of an Israeli study showed that ARTs were aggressively utilized due to the religious emphasis on procreation in the nation [22].

Table 2.1: Respondents’ Perceptions towards ARTs.

Variable

SD

D

NA/D

A

SA

Mean ± SD

ART have more benefit than hazards

1 (1)

6 (6)

28 (28)

47 (47)

18 (18)

3.78±0.82

The risks associated with the use of ART can be effectively managed

-

2 (2)

11 (11)

78 (78)

9 (9)

3.94±0.53

Assisted reproductive technologies can help most women have a baby prior to menopause

-

3 (3)

13 (13)

59 (59)

25 (25)

4.06±0.71

Most fertility clinics will not provide treatment to women over 45 years

5 (5)

27 (27)

29 (29)

30 (30)

9 (9)

3.11±1.06

Children conceived through the use of ARTs develop long term health problems

11 (11)

45 (45)

26 (26)

8 (8)

10 (10)

2.61±1.11

 Most couples go through IVF more than once to have a baby

2 (2)

17 (17)

21 (21)

46 (46)

14 (14)

3.53±1.00

ART is very expensive and cannot be recommended to anyone

4 (4)

28 (28)

16 (16)

35 (35)

17 (17)

3.33±1.17

Babies who are born with ART behave abnormally

31 (31)

45 (45)

12 (12)

10 (10)

2 (2)

2.07±1.01

ARTs are techniques that experiments with human beings

5 (5)

27 (27)

15 (15)

43 (43)

10 (10)

3.26±1.12

 IVF is not very attractive as the success rate is very low

8 (8)

25 (25)

32 (32)

27 (27)

8 (8)

3.02±1.08

 Total n (%)

100 (100)

IVF: In-Vitro Fertilization; SD=Strongly Disagree, D= Disagree, NA/D= Neither Agree/ Disagree, A=Agree, SA= Strongly agree, SD= Standard Deviation.

Table2.2: Summary of respondent’s perception towards ARTs.

Range of Ranking for Perception Towards ART

Frequency

Percentage (%)

Remarks

0-8

49

49

 

Negative

9-16

51

51

Positive

Grand Total

100

100

 

Table 3.1: Willingness of the respondents to utilize ARTs.

Variable

Not likely n (%)

Not really likely n (%)

Undecided n (%)

Somewhat likely n (%)

Likely n (%)

Mean ± SD

Would you likely consider IVF If you and your partner had difficulties becoming pregnant

6 (6)

13 (13)

21 (21)

18 (18)

42 (42)

3.77 ± 1.29

Would you consider using the eggs of another woman to produce an embryo If you or your partner were unable to produce a child

36 (36)

9 (9)

23 (23)

13 (13)

19 (19)

2.70 ± 1.53

Would you likely consider using the eggs from a donor known to you

31 (31)

29 (29)

19 (19)

7 (7)

14 (14)

2.44 ± 1.37

Would you likely consider a surrogate If you were unable to carry a child in your own uterus

18 (18)

26 (26)

20 (20)

12 (12)

24 (24)

2.98 ± 1.44

 Would you likely pursue pregnancy with a donated embryo if you and your partner have fertility problems

29 (29)

25 (25)

23 (23)

8 (8)

15 (15)

2.55 ± 1.38

 would you consider having your eggs/sperm frozen

24 (24)

10 (10)

29 (29)

16 (16)

21 (21)

3.00 ± 1.44

Would you likely consider ICSI to treat a fertility problem with your partner

17 (17)

12 (12)

29 (29)

22 (22)

20 (20)

3.16 ± 1.35

Would you consider using a sperm from a known donor If your partner was infertile

32 (32)

20 (20)

25 (25)

16 (16)

7 (7)

2.46 ± 1.28

Would you consider using sperm from an anonymous donor If your partner was infertile

26 (26)

22 (22)

23 (23)

15 (15)

14 (14)

2.95 ± 3.14

Would you consider buying and using home fertility test devices

16 (16)

13 (13)

17 (17)

19 (19)

35 (35)

3.44 ± 1.48

ICSI: Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection.

Table 3.2: Summary of willingness of the respondents to utilize ARTs.

Range of willingness of Nurses Towards ART (score)

Frequency

Percentage (%)

Remarks

0-10

51

51

Poor

11-20

49

49

Good

Grand Total

100

100

 

Table 4: Relationship between nurses’ level of education and their willingness to utilize ARTs.

Variable

Category

Frequency of poor willingness (%)

Frequency of good willingness (%)

Chi square value

df

p-value

Level of educational qualification

Degree

Masters

PhD

RN/RM

19

4

-

17

31

-

1

28

19.908

12

0.091

df: degree of freedom; p: probability value.

Figure 1: Bar graph showing the factors influencing perception towards assisted reproductive technologies.

Figure 1: Bar graph showing the factors influencing perception towards assisted reproductive technologies.

 

The socio-cultural and religious beliefs of the participants in the study proved to be a major setback in their willingness to use ART. Previous studies have also proven this fact [23,24]. Explanations given by women attending an infertility clinic in the southwest region of Nigeria for refusing ARTs exposed a strong religious influence [6]. Other studies showed differing opinions in the religious perspective towards ARTs, and support was only shown by participants if it is done within the confines of marriage [15-25], while others do not consider religious affiliations to be significant [13].

However, in some studies, participants considered financial expenses and socioeconomic status as significant factors influencing their perception and willingness to opt for ART [7-26]. Given the high poverty index in Nigeria, the cost of ART procedures could be a major factor hindering its use [12-26]. The high cost could be due to the issue of poor regulation of ART services, which are majorly offered by the private sector. Nevertheless, an Iranian study conducted among infertile couples showed that socioeconomic status did not have any effect on the attitude of the participants towards ARTs, but the authors opined that it may still change due to the running costs of undergoing ART procedures [27]. The study established that access to information about ARTs would improve nurses’ perceptions. This is congruent with the study carried out by Jegede and Fayemiwo, which established that an obstacle to the use of ART is the evident knowledge gap [12].

Limitation of the Study

The study used a cross-sectional study design that has limitations in the methods in terms of ascertaining influencing factors on the perception and utilization of ARTs. Also, only female nurses were involved in the study. Additionally, the study was only conducted in one setting, which could limit generalization. These limitations should be considered when interpreting the findings.

REFERENCES
  1. Mascarenhas MN, Flaxman SR, Boerma T, Vanderpoel S, Stevens GA. National, regional, and global trends in infertility prevalence since 1990: a systematic analysis of 277 health surveys. PLoS Med. 2012; 9: e1001356. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001356. Epub 2012 Dec 18. PMID: 23271957; PMCID: PMC3525527.
  2. World Health Organization (WHO). International Classification of Diseases, 11th Revision (ICD-11) Geneva: WHO. 2018.
  3. American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Assisted Reproductive Technology; A Guide for Patients. 2018.
  4. Inhorn MC, Patrizio P. Infertility around the globe: new thinking on gender, reproductive technologies and global movements in the 21st century. Hum Reprod Update. 2015; 21: 411-426. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmv016. Epub 2015 Mar 22. PMID: 25801630.
  5. Chiware TM., Vermeulen N, Blondeel K, Farquharson R, Kiarie J, Lundin K, et al. IVF and other ART in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic landscape analysis. Human reproduction update. 2021; 27: 213-228.
  6. Bello FA, Akinajo OR, Olayemi O. In-vitro fertilization, gamete donation and surrogacy: perceptions of women attending an infertility clinic in Ibadan, Nigeria. Afr J Reprod Health. 2014; 18: 127-133. PMID: 25022149.
  7. Latifnejad Roudsari R, Jafari H, Taghipour A. The relationship of sociocultural beliefs and infertile couples' attitude toward reproductive donation: A descriptive-correlational study. Int J Reprod Biomed. 2018; 17: 315-324. doi: 10.18502/ijrm.v17i5.4599. PMID: 31435614; PMCID: PMC6653494.
  8. Bracewell-Milnes T, Saso S, Bora S, Ismail AM, Al-Memar M, Hamed AH, et al. Investigating psychosocial attitudes, motivations and experiences of oocyte donors, recipients and egg sharers: a systematic review. Hum Reprod Update. 2016; 22: 450-465. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmw006. Epub 2016 Mar 24. PMID: 27016289.
  9. Michael E. Human Dignity and Assisted Human Reproduction: Bioethical Challenges within the Nigerian Context. Research on Humanities and Social Sciences. 2017; 7.
  10. sbir GG, Ozan YD. Nursing and midwifery students' experiences with the course of infertility and assisted reproductive techniques: A focus group study from Turkey. Nurse Educ Pract. 2018; 28: 235-241. doi: 10.1016/j.nepr.2017.10.002. Epub 2017 Oct 7. PMID: 29128735.
  11. Kasten S, van Osch L, Candel M, de Vries H. The influence of pre-motivational factors on behavior via motivational factors: a test of the I-Change model. BMC Psychol. 2019; 7: 7. doi: 10.1186/s40359-019-0283-2. PMID: 30786921; PMCID: PMC6381617.
  12. Omokanye LO, Olatinwo AO, Durowade KA, Raji ST, Biliaminu SA, Salaudeen GA. Assisted Reproduction Technology: Perceptions among infertile couples in llorin, Nigeria. Saudi J Health Sci. 2017; 6: 14-18.
  13. Jimoh A, Saka A, Saidu R, Salaudeen GAS, Saka AO, Raji Ho, et al. Sperm Bank Scheme And Surrogacy Institution;-willingness And Utilization Of Assisted Reproductive Technology Among Women Of Reproductive Age Group In Ilorin. Nigeria. Wajar. 2011; 2: 33-39.
  14. Okonofua F. New reproductive technologies and infertility treatment in Africa. Afr J Reprod Health. 2003; 7: 7-11. English, French. PMID: 12816308.
  15. Ajagunna FO. Promoting Access to Assisted Reproductive Technology in Nigeria Through the Rights to Benefits of Scientific Progress: An Appraisal. UJPPL. 2019; 4: 18-30.
  16. Jegede AS, Fayemiwo AS. Cultural and ethical challenges of assisted reproductive technologies in the management of infertility among the Yoruba of southwestern Nigeria. Afr J Reprod Health. 2010; 14: 115-127. PMID: 21243924.
  17. Queiroz ABA, Mohamed RPDS, Moura MAV, Souza IEO, Carvalho MCMP, Vieira BDG. Nursing work in assisted human reproduction: between technology and humanization. Rev Bras Enferm. 2020; 73: e20170919. English, Portuguese. doi: 10.1590/0034-7167-2017-0919. PMID: 32267408.
  18. KO Fayokun. Need for Regulation of Assisted Reproductive Techniques in Africa. J Sci Sus Dev. 2010; 3: 165-170.
  19. Akande SO, Dipeolu IO, Ajuwon AJ. ATTITUDE AND WILLINGNESS OF INFERTILE PERSONS TOWARDS THE UPTAKE OF ASSISTED REPRODUCTIVE TECHNOLOGIES IN IBADAN, NIGERIA. Ann Ib Postgrad Med. 2019; 17: 51-58. PMID: 31768157; PMCID: PMC6871203.
  20. Daniluk JC, Koert E. Childless Canadian men's and women's childbearing intentions, attitudes towards and willingness to use assisted human reproduction. Hum Reprod. 2012; 27: 2405-2412. doi: 10.1093/humrep/des190. Epub 2012 Jun 8. PMID: 22684907.
  21. Adesiyun AG, Ameh N, Avidime S, Muazu A. Awareness and perception of assisted reproductive technology practice amongst women with infertility in Northern Nigeria. Open Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2011; 1: 144-148.
  22. Inhorn Marcia  Birenbaum-Carmeli Daphna. Assisted Reproductive Technologies and Culture Change. Annual Review of Anthropology. 2008; 37: 177-196.
  23. SO Aluko-Arowolo, SJ Ayodele. The effects of native culture and religious beliefs on human infertility and assisted reproductive treatment: A focus on the Ijebu people of Nigeria. African Journal of Social Sciences. (2014); 4: 88-102.
  24. Sabarre KA, Khan Z, Whitten AN, Remes O, Phillips KP. A qualitative study of Ottawa university students' awareness, knowledge and perceptions of infertility, infertility risk factors and assisted reproductive technologies (ART). Reprod Health. 2013; 10: 41. doi: 10.1186/1742-4755-10-41. PMID: 23962162; PMCID: PMC3751831.
  25. Bamgbopa Kehinde T, Okonta Patrick I, Ajayi Richardson, Ogbeche Rose, Igbokwe Cynthia, Onwuzurigbo Kingsley. Public perceptions on ethics in the practice of assisted reproductive technologies in Nigeria. Global Reproductive Health. 2018; 3: e13.
  26. Okafor Ifeanyichukwu Michael, Nneka Ifeoma, Paul Hezekiah, I. Abada Michael. New National Minimum Wage and States' Viability in Nigeria's Fragile Economy. 2019; 4: 20-36.
  27. Afshani SA, Abdoli AM, Hashempour M, Baghbeheshti M, Zolfaghari M. The attitudes of infertile couples towards assisted reproductive techniques in Yazd, Iran: A cross sectional study in 2014. Int J Reprod Biomed. 2016; 14: 761-768. PMID: 28066835; PMCID: PMC5203691.

Adebayo AP, Akinwaare MO, Eze CJ, Akingbade O (2024) Perception and Willingness of Nurses in Nigeria towards Utilization of Assisted Reproductive Technologies. Ann Nurs Pract 11(1): 1137

Received : 09 Sep 2024
Accepted : 05 Nov 2024
Published : 08 Nov 2024
Journals
Annals of Otolaryngology and Rhinology
ISSN : 2379-948X
Launched : 2014
JSM Schizophrenia
Launched : 2016
Journal of Nausea
Launched : 2020
JSM Internal Medicine
Launched : 2016
JSM Hepatitis
Launched : 2016
JSM Oro Facial Surgeries
ISSN : 2578-3211
Launched : 2016
Journal of Human Nutrition and Food Science
ISSN : 2333-6706
Launched : 2013
JSM Regenerative Medicine and Bioengineering
ISSN : 2379-0490
Launched : 2013
JSM Spine
ISSN : 2578-3181
Launched : 2016
Archives of Palliative Care
ISSN : 2573-1165
Launched : 2016
JSM Nutritional Disorders
ISSN : 2578-3203
Launched : 2017
Annals of Neurodegenerative Disorders
ISSN : 2476-2032
Launched : 2016
Journal of Fever
ISSN : 2641-7782
Launched : 2017
JSM Bone Marrow Research
ISSN : 2578-3351
Launched : 2016
JSM Mathematics and Statistics
ISSN : 2578-3173
Launched : 2014
Journal of Autoimmunity and Research
ISSN : 2573-1173
Launched : 2014
JSM Arthritis
ISSN : 2475-9155
Launched : 2016
JSM Head and Neck Cancer-Cases and Reviews
ISSN : 2573-1610
Launched : 2016
JSM General Surgery Cases and Images
ISSN : 2573-1564
Launched : 2016
JSM Anatomy and Physiology
ISSN : 2573-1262
Launched : 2016
JSM Dental Surgery
ISSN : 2573-1548
Launched : 2016
Annals of Emergency Surgery
ISSN : 2573-1017
Launched : 2016
Annals of Mens Health and Wellness
ISSN : 2641-7707
Launched : 2017
Journal of Preventive Medicine and Health Care
ISSN : 2576-0084
Launched : 2018
Journal of Chronic Diseases and Management
ISSN : 2573-1300
Launched : 2016
Annals of Vaccines and Immunization
ISSN : 2378-9379
Launched : 2014
JSM Heart Surgery Cases and Images
ISSN : 2578-3157
Launched : 2016
Annals of Reproductive Medicine and Treatment
ISSN : 2573-1092
Launched : 2016
JSM Brain Science
ISSN : 2573-1289
Launched : 2016
JSM Biomarkers
ISSN : 2578-3815
Launched : 2014
JSM Biology
ISSN : 2475-9392
Launched : 2016
Archives of Stem Cell and Research
ISSN : 2578-3580
Launched : 2014
Annals of Clinical and Medical Microbiology
ISSN : 2578-3629
Launched : 2014
JSM Pediatric Surgery
ISSN : 2578-3149
Launched : 2017
Journal of Memory Disorder and Rehabilitation
ISSN : 2578-319X
Launched : 2016
JSM Tropical Medicine and Research
ISSN : 2578-3165
Launched : 2016
JSM Head and Face Medicine
ISSN : 2578-3793
Launched : 2016
JSM Cardiothoracic Surgery
ISSN : 2573-1297
Launched : 2016
JSM Bone and Joint Diseases
ISSN : 2578-3351
Launched : 2017
JSM Bioavailability and Bioequivalence
ISSN : 2641-7812
Launched : 2017
JSM Atherosclerosis
ISSN : 2573-1270
Launched : 2016
Journal of Genitourinary Disorders
ISSN : 2641-7790
Launched : 2017
Journal of Fractures and Sprains
ISSN : 2578-3831
Launched : 2016
Journal of Autism and Epilepsy
ISSN : 2641-7774
Launched : 2016
Annals of Marine Biology and Research
ISSN : 2573-105X
Launched : 2014
JSM Health Education & Primary Health Care
ISSN : 2578-3777
Launched : 2016
JSM Communication Disorders
ISSN : 2578-3807
Launched : 2016
Annals of Musculoskeletal Disorders
ISSN : 2578-3599
Launched : 2016
Annals of Virology and Research
ISSN : 2573-1122
Launched : 2014
JSM Renal Medicine
ISSN : 2573-1637
Launched : 2016
Journal of Muscle Health
ISSN : 2578-3823
Launched : 2016
JSM Genetics and Genomics
ISSN : 2334-1823
Launched : 2013
JSM Anxiety and Depression
ISSN : 2475-9139
Launched : 2016
Clinical Journal of Heart Diseases
ISSN : 2641-7766
Launched : 2016
Annals of Medicinal Chemistry and Research
ISSN : 2378-9336
Launched : 2014
JSM Pain and Management
ISSN : 2578-3378
Launched : 2016
JSM Women's Health
ISSN : 2578-3696
Launched : 2016
Clinical Research in HIV or AIDS
ISSN : 2374-0094
Launched : 2013
Journal of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Obesity
ISSN : 2333-6692
Launched : 2013
Journal of Substance Abuse and Alcoholism
ISSN : 2373-9363
Launched : 2013
JSM Neurosurgery and Spine
ISSN : 2373-9479
Launched : 2013
Journal of Liver and Clinical Research
ISSN : 2379-0830
Launched : 2014
Journal of Drug Design and Research
ISSN : 2379-089X
Launched : 2014
JSM Clinical Oncology and Research
ISSN : 2373-938X
Launched : 2013
JSM Bioinformatics, Genomics and Proteomics
ISSN : 2576-1102
Launched : 2014
JSM Chemistry
ISSN : 2334-1831
Launched : 2013
Journal of Trauma and Care
ISSN : 2573-1246
Launched : 2014
JSM Surgical Oncology and Research
ISSN : 2578-3688
Launched : 2016
Annals of Food Processing and Preservation
ISSN : 2573-1033
Launched : 2016
Journal of Radiology and Radiation Therapy
ISSN : 2333-7095
Launched : 2013
JSM Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
ISSN : 2578-3572
Launched : 2016
Annals of Clinical Pathology
ISSN : 2373-9282
Launched : 2013
Annals of Cardiovascular Diseases
ISSN : 2641-7731
Launched : 2016
Journal of Behavior
ISSN : 2576-0076
Launched : 2016
Annals of Clinical and Experimental Metabolism
ISSN : 2572-2492
Launched : 2016
Clinical Research in Infectious Diseases
ISSN : 2379-0636
Launched : 2013
JSM Microbiology
ISSN : 2333-6455
Launched : 2013
Journal of Urology and Research
ISSN : 2379-951X
Launched : 2014
Journal of Family Medicine and Community Health
ISSN : 2379-0547
Launched : 2013
Annals of Pregnancy and Care
ISSN : 2578-336X
Launched : 2017
JSM Cell and Developmental Biology
ISSN : 2379-061X
Launched : 2013
Annals of Aquaculture and Research
ISSN : 2379-0881
Launched : 2014
Clinical Research in Pulmonology
ISSN : 2333-6625
Launched : 2013
Journal of Immunology and Clinical Research
ISSN : 2333-6714
Launched : 2013
Annals of Forensic Research and Analysis
ISSN : 2378-9476
Launched : 2014
JSM Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
ISSN : 2333-7109
Launched : 2013
Annals of Breast Cancer Research
ISSN : 2641-7685
Launched : 2016
Annals of Gerontology and Geriatric Research
ISSN : 2378-9409
Launched : 2014
Journal of Sleep Medicine and Disorders
ISSN : 2379-0822
Launched : 2014
JSM Burns and Trauma
ISSN : 2475-9406
Launched : 2016
Chemical Engineering and Process Techniques
ISSN : 2333-6633
Launched : 2013
Annals of Clinical Cytology and Pathology
ISSN : 2475-9430
Launched : 2014
JSM Allergy and Asthma
ISSN : 2573-1254
Launched : 2016
Journal of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
ISSN : 2334-2307
Launched : 2013
Annals of Sports Medicine and Research
ISSN : 2379-0571
Launched : 2014
JSM Sexual Medicine
ISSN : 2578-3718
Launched : 2016
Annals of Vascular Medicine and Research
ISSN : 2378-9344
Launched : 2014
JSM Biotechnology and Biomedical Engineering
ISSN : 2333-7117
Launched : 2013
Journal of Hematology and Transfusion
ISSN : 2333-6684
Launched : 2013
JSM Environmental Science and Ecology
ISSN : 2333-7141
Launched : 2013
Journal of Cardiology and Clinical Research
ISSN : 2333-6676
Launched : 2013
JSM Nanotechnology and Nanomedicine
ISSN : 2334-1815
Launched : 2013
Journal of Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders
ISSN : 2475-9473
Launched : 2016
JSM Ophthalmology
ISSN : 2333-6447
Launched : 2013
Journal of Pharmacology and Clinical Toxicology
ISSN : 2333-7079
Launched : 2013
Annals of Psychiatry and Mental Health
ISSN : 2374-0124
Launched : 2013
Medical Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
ISSN : 2333-6439
Launched : 2013
Annals of Pediatrics and Child Health
ISSN : 2373-9312
Launched : 2013
JSM Clinical Pharmaceutics
ISSN : 2379-9498
Launched : 2014
JSM Foot and Ankle
ISSN : 2475-9112
Launched : 2016
JSM Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementia
ISSN : 2378-9565
Launched : 2014
Journal of Addiction Medicine and Therapy
ISSN : 2333-665X
Launched : 2013
Journal of Veterinary Medicine and Research
ISSN : 2378-931X
Launched : 2013
Annals of Public Health and Research
ISSN : 2378-9328
Launched : 2014
Annals of Orthopedics and Rheumatology
ISSN : 2373-9290
Launched : 2013
Journal of Clinical Nephrology and Research
ISSN : 2379-0652
Launched : 2014
Annals of Community Medicine and Practice
ISSN : 2475-9465
Launched : 2014
Annals of Biometrics and Biostatistics
ISSN : 2374-0116
Launched : 2013
JSM Clinical Case Reports
ISSN : 2373-9819
Launched : 2013
Journal of Cancer Biology and Research
ISSN : 2373-9436
Launched : 2013
Journal of Surgery and Transplantation Science
ISSN : 2379-0911
Launched : 2013
Journal of Dermatology and Clinical Research
ISSN : 2373-9371
Launched : 2013
JSM Gastroenterology and Hepatology
ISSN : 2373-9487
Launched : 2013
JSM Dentistry
ISSN : 2333-7133
Launched : 2013
Author Information X