Table 8. Perception of AOX treatment in clinical practice from the point of view of the participants.
| SN | Survey questions | Self-reported responses | |
|---|---|---|---|
| A | Strength of the evidence for AOX use in male infertility (n=1,152) | ||
| The evidence supporting its use is modest | 602 (52.3) | ||
| There is no good evidence supporting its use | 256 (22.2) | ||
| The evidence supporting its use is strong | 227 (19.7) | ||
| Do not know or not applicable to my practice | 49 (4.3) | ||
| There is evidence against its use | 18 (1.5) | ||
| B | Limitations for AOX use | ||
| Cost | 611 (52.1) | ||
| Long-time therapy postponing definitive treatment (e.g., ART) | 528 (45.0) | ||
| Low treatment adherence | 323 (27.6) | ||
| Not effective | 291 (24.8) | ||
| Side effects | 44 (3.7) | ||
| Uncertain benefit | 16 (1.4) | ||
| Lack of good evidence supporting their use | 14 (1.2) | ||
| Other | 11 (0.9) | ||
| No good evidence supporting its benefit | 7 (0.6) | ||
| They are effective only in specific patients' subgroups | 4 (0.3) | ||
| C | Endpoints to be evaluated after AOX treatment | ||
| Standard semen parameters | 648 (55.3) | ||
| Live birth rate | 644 (54.9) | ||
| Sperm DNA fragmentation (SDF) | 576 (49.1) | ||
| Clinical/ongoing pregnancy rate | 555 (47.3) | ||
| Reactive oxygen species (ROS) | 345 (29.4) | ||
| Miscarriage rate | 278 (23.7) | ||
| Oxidation-reduction potential (ORP) | 217 (18.5) | ||
| Total antioxidant capacity (TAC) | 173 (14.7) | ||
| Other | 5 (0.4) | ||
| D | The necessity of clinical practice guidelines | ||
| Helpful, although more well-designed clinical trials would be needed | 521 (44.5) | ||
| Much needed, as clear guidelines on the topic are lacking | 607 (51.8) | ||
| Not necessary, as antioxidants are already proved to be effective | 19 (1.6) | ||
| Not necessary, as antioxidants are ineffective | 25 (2.1) | ||
Values are presented as number (%).
SN: serial number, AOX: antioxidant, ART: assisted reproductive technology.