Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Dec 6:16:4909-4919.
doi: 10.2147/PRBM.S437808. eCollection 2023.

Relationship Between Dyadic Coping with Anxiety and Depression in Infertile Couples: Gender Differences and Dyadic Interaction

Affiliations

Relationship Between Dyadic Coping with Anxiety and Depression in Infertile Couples: Gender Differences and Dyadic Interaction

Nan Tang et al. Psychol Res Behav Manag. .

Abstract

Background: This study aims to examine the relationship between anxiety and depression and dyadic coping in infertile couples, exploring gender differences and dyadic interactions in these associations.

Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted involving 288 couples recruited from the First Affiliated Hospital of Lanzhou University between November 2021 and November 2022. The Dyadic Coping Scale, Anxiety Scale, and Depression Scale were utilized to measure dyadic coping, anxiety, and depression, respectively. The Actor-Partner Interdependence Model was used to analyze the actor effect and partner effect.

Results: Wives exhibited significantly higher anxiety and depression scores compared to husbands (p<0.001). No statistically significant difference was found in dyadic coping between wives and husbands. Positive dyadic coping in infertile couples had significant actor effects on anxiety and depression (p<0.05) and partner effects (p<0.05). Positive dyadic coping negatively predicted anxiety and depression of oneself and one's partner. Negative dyadic coping in infertile couples also had significant actor effects on anxiety and depression (p<0.05) and partner effects (p<0.05). Negative dyadic coping positively predicted anxiety and depression of oneself and one's partner.

Conclusion: The dyadic coping style of infertile couples has both actor and partner effects on their own and their partner's anxiety and depression. Anxiety and depression in infertile couples are influenced by their own and their partner's dyadic coping style, respectively. Therefore, dyadic coping serves as an important indicator for predicting psychological outcomes in these couples.

Keywords: anxiety; depression; dyadic coping; infertility couple.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest in this work.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The hypothetical model of actor and partner effects of the wife’s and husband’s positive or negative DC on negative emotion (a represents actor effect, p represents partner effect).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Standardized parameter estimates of actor and partner effects of the wife’s and husband’s positive DC on negative emotion. *P < 0.05; ***P < 0.000.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Standardized parameter estimates of actor and partner effects of the wife’s and husband’s negative DC on negative emotion. *P < 0.05; ***P < 0.000.

References

    1. Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Electronic address aao. Definitions of infertility and recurrent pregnancy loss: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2020;113(3):533–535. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.11.025 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Agarwal A, Baskaran S, Parekh N, et al. Male infertility. Lancet. 2021;397(10271):319–333. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(20)32667-2 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Zhou Z, Zheng D, Wu H, et al. Epidemiology of infertility in China: a population-based study. BJOG. 2018;125(4):432–441. doi:10.1111/1471-0528.14966 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Iordachescu DA, Paica CI, Boca AE, et al. Anxiety, difficulties, and coping of infertile women. Healthcare. 2021;9(4):466. doi:10.3390/healthcare9040466 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Gullo G, Perino A, Cucinella G. Open vs. closed vitrification system: which one is safer? Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2022;26(4):1065–1067. doi:10.26355/eurrev_202202_28092 - DOI - PubMed