Factors Influencing Artificial Insemination among Couples: A Review

Noha Mahgoub Mohamed Ali Mahgoub *

NMC Royal Medical Center LTD, UAE.

*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.


All men and women, who have settled in their relationships already or are beginning to think of getting settled, have to ultimately think about conceiving their babies sooner or later. However, even in a modern and advanced world like ours, this is not easy at all. There have been several instances of cases where people are unable to conceive healthy babies, due to a myriad of reasons. These reasons could solely be due to any disorders in the female partner, or in the male partner. Infrequently, these disorders are due to the combined presence of problems in both partners that lead to factors like infertility in such people. Whatever the cause behind infertility is, it would inadvertently lead to mental and emotional compromise of both partners in the long term. Thankfully enough, there are several techniques and treatment modalities that have been introduced to take care of the problem at hand. Artificial insemination is one such treatment modality that has proved to be a shining light in the lives of many people who have already tried and tested many other conventional methods of conceiving but have not received any success despite trying them. Artificial insemination has several other sub-types and variants that are employed for people depending on the underlying factors that have been creating hurdles in the process of procreating for them. Although it is found to be highly successful in the majority of cases, there are also some people who do not receive any kind of benefit from this method as well. This is when people’s mental health takes turmoil and makes them even more depressed about their current situation in life. There are also several physical implications of the method itself that negatively impact a person’s life and make them miserable. This review tends to deal with that side of the story and bring forward all those physical and emotional aspects of trying out artificial insemination in front of the world. It is only fair and wise to let the people know what they are getting into, as educating them about it would help achieve better outcomes too. This review will also explore the side effects of artificial insemination.

Keywords: Artificial insemination, infertility, childbirth, assisted reproduction, conceiving, intrauterine insemination

How to Cite

Mahgoub , Noha Mahgoub Mohamed Ali. 2023. “Factors Influencing Artificial Insemination Among Couples: A Review”. International Journal of Research and Reports in Gynaecology 6 (1):43-48. https://journalijrrgy.com/index.php/IJRRGY/article/view/83.


Download data is not yet available.


Mellagi APG, Will KJ, Quirino M, Bustamante-Filho IC, Ulguim R da R, Bortolozzo FP. Update on artificial insemination: Semen, techniques, and sow fertility. Mol Reprod Dev. 2023;90(7): 601–11.

Ombelet W, Van Robays J. Artificial insemination history: Hurdles and milestones. Facts Views Vis ObGyn. 2015;7(2):137–43.

Starosta A, Gordon CE, Hornstein MD. Predictive factors for intrauterine insemination outcomes: a review. Fertil Res Pract. 2020;6:23.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Unexplained Infertility - PMC [Internet].

[Cited 2023 Sep 30]. Available:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2505167/

Duran HE, Morshedi M, Kruger T, Oehninger S. Intrauterine insemination: A systematic review on determinants of success. In: Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE): Quality-assessed Reviews [Internet] [Internet]. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (UK); 2002.

[Cited 2023 Sep 17]. Available:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK69036/

ESHRE Capri Workshop Group. Intrauterine insemination. Hum Reprod Update. 2009;15(3):265–77.

Sacks PC, Simon JA. Infectious complications of intrauterine insemination: A case report and literature review. Int J Fertil. 1991;36(6):331–9.

Choe J, Shanks AL. In Vitro Fertilization. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2023.

[Cited 2023 Sep 17]. Available:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK562266/

Zheng D, Zeng L, Yang R, Lian Y, Zhu YM, Liang X, et al. Intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) versus conventional in vitro fertilisation (IVF) in couples with non-severe male infertility (NSMI-ICSI): Protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open. 2019; 9(9):e030366.

Yang S, Peng HY, Li Y, Zhou LY, Yuan L, Ma YM, et al. Intrauterine insemination treatment strategy for women over 35 years old: Based on a large sample multi-center retrospective analysis. Chin Med J (Engl). 2016;129(23):2873–5.

Allahbadia GN. Intrauterine insemination: Fundamentals revisited. J Obstet Gynaecol India. 2017;67(6):385–92.

Huniadi A, Bimbo-Szuhai E, Botea M, Zaha I, Beiusanu C, Pallag A, et al. Fertility predictors in intrauterine insemination (IUI). J Pers Med. 2023;13(3):395.

Wessel JA, Hunt S, van Wely M, Mol F, Wang R. Alternatives to in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 2023;120(3 Pt 1):483–93.

Starosta A, Gordon CE, Hornstein MD. Predictive factors for intrauterine insemination outcomes: a review. Fertil Res Pract. 2020;6:23.

Ayeleke RO, Asseler JD, Cohlen BJ, Veltman‐Verhulst SM. Intra‐uterine insemination for unexplained subfertility. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020;2020(3):CD001838.

Mandia L, Personeni C, Antonazzo P, Angileri SA, Pinto A, Savasi V. Ultrasound in Infertility Setting: Optimal Strategy to Evaluate the Assessment of Tubal Patency. BioMed Res Int. 2017;2017: 3205895.

Cai H, Xie J, Shi J, Wang H. Efficacy of intrauterine insemination in women with endometrioma-associated subfertility: analysis using propensity score matching. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2022;22:12.

Smikle C, Yarrarapu SNS, Khetarpal S. Asherman Syndrome. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2023.

[Cited 2023 Sep 17].


Stone BA, Vargyas JM, Ringler GE, Stein AL, Marrs RP. Determinants of the outcome of intrauterine insemination: analysis of outcomes of 9963 consecutive cycles. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999;180(6 Pt 1):1522–34.

de Araújo LF, de Araújo Filho E, Fácio CL, Bossoni MC, Machado-Paula LA, Corrente JE, et al. Efficacy of sperm motility after processing and incubation to predict pregnancy after intrauterine insemination in normospermic individuals. Reprod Biol Endocrinol RBE. 2013;11:101.

Nikbakht R, Saharkhiz N. The influence of sperm morphology, total motile sperm count of semen and the number of motile sperm inseminated in sperm samples on the success of intrauterine insemination. Int J Fertil Steril. 2011;5(3):168–73.

Boomsma CM, Cohlen BJ, Farquhar C. Semen preparation techniques for intrauterine insemination. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019;2019(10): CD004507.

Ruiter-Ligeti J, Agbo C, Dahan M. The impact of semen processing on sperm parameters and pregnancy rates with intrauterine inseminations. Minerva Ginecol. 2017;69(3):218–24.

Firouz M, Noori N, Ghasemi M, Dashipour A, Keikha N. Comparing the effectiveness of doing intra-uterine insemination 36 and 42 hours after human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) injection on pregnancy rate: A randomized clinical trial. J Fam Reprod Health. 2020;14(3):173–9.

Oždian T, Vodička J, Dostál J, Holub D, Václavková J, Ješeta M, et al. Proteome mapping of cervical mucus and its potential as a source of biomarkers in female tract disorders. Int J Mol Sci. 2023;24(2):1038.

Farquhar C, Rombauts L, Kremer JA, Lethaby A, Ayeleke RO. Oral contraceptive pill, progestogen or oestrogen pretreatment for ovarian stimulation protocols for women undergoing assisted reproductive techniques. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;2017(5): CD006109.