Oocyte cryopreservation versus ovarian tissue cryopreservation for adult female oncofertility patients: a cost-effectiveness study

PURPOSE

In December 2019, the American Society for Reproductive Medicine designated ovarian tissue cryopreservation (OTC) as no longer experimental and an alternative to oocyte cryopreservation (OC) for women receiving gonadotoxic therapy. Anticipating increased use of OTC, we compare the cost-effectiveness of OC versus OTC for fertility preservation in oncofertility patients.

METHODS

A cost-effectiveness model to compare OC versus OTC was built from a payer perspective. Costs and probabilities were derived from the literature. The primary outcome for effectiveness was the percentage of patients who achieved live birth. Strategies were compared using incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). All inputs were varied widely in sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

In the base case, the estimated cost for OC was $16,588 and for OTC $10,032, with 1.56% achieving live birth after OC, and 1.0% after OTC. OC was more costly but more effective than OTC, with an ICER of $1,163,954 per live birth. In sensitivity analyses, OC was less expensive than OTC if utilization was greater than 63%, cost of OC prior to chemotherapy was less than $8100, cost of laparoscopy was greater than $13,700, or standardized discounted costs were used.

CONCLUSIONS

With current published prices and utilization, OC is more costly but more effective than OTC. OC becomes cost-saving with increased utilization, when cost of OC prior to chemotherapy is markedly low, cost of laparoscopy is high, or standardized discounted oncofertility pricing is assumed. We identify the critical thresholds of OC and OTC that should be met to deliver more cost-effective care for oncofertility patients.

Cumulative Live Birth Rate and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Gonadotropin Releasing Hormone-Antagonist Protocol and Multiple Minimal Ovarian Stimulation in Poor Responders

BACKGROUND

The overall cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) of poor ovarian responders (POR) is extremely low. Minimal ovarian stimulation (MOS) provides a relatively realistic solution for ovarian stimulation in POR. Our study aimed to investigate whether multiple MOS strategies resulted in higher CLBR compared to conventional gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists in POR.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 699 patients (1,058 cycles) from one center, who fulfilled the Bologna criteria between 2010 and 2018. Overall, 325 women (325 cycles) were treated with one-time conventional GnRH antagonist ovarian stimulation (GnRH-antagonist). Another 374 patients (733 cycles) were treated with multiple MOS including natural cycles. CLBR and time-and-cost-benefit analyses were compared between these two groups of women.

RESULTS

GnRH antagonists provided more retrieved oocytes, meiosis II oocytes, fertilized oocytes, and more viable embryos compared to both the first MOS (p < 0.001) and the cumulative corresponding numbers in multiple MOSs (p < 0.001). For the first in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycle, GnRH antagonists resulted in higher CLBR than MOS [12.92 versus 4.54%, adjusted OR (odds ratio) 2.606; 95% CI (confidence interval) 1.386, 4.899, p = 0.003]. The one-time GnRH-antagonist induced comparable CLBR (12.92 versus 7.92%, adjusted OR 1.702; 95% CI 0.971, 2.982, p = 0.063), but a shorter time to live birth [9 (8, 10.75) months versus 11 (9, 14) months, p = 0.014] and similar financial expenditure compared to repeated MOS [20,838 (17,953, 23,422) ¥ versus 21,261.5 (15,892.5, 35,140.25) ¥, p = 0.13].

CONCLUSION

Both minimal ovarian stimulation (MOS) and GnRH-antagonists provide low chances of live birth in poor responders. The GnRH antagonist protocol is considered a suitable choice for PORs with comparable CLBR, shorter times to live birth, and similar financial expenditure compared to repeated MOS.

Septate uterus according to ESHRE/ESGE, ASRM and CUME definitions: association with infertility and miscarriage, cost and warnings for women and healthcare systems

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the differences in frequency of diagnosis of septate uterus using three different definitions and determine whether these differences are significant in clinical practice, and to examine the association between diagnosis of septate uterus, using each of the three definitions, and infertility and/or previous miscarriage as well as the cost of allocation to surgery.

METHODS

This was a secondary analysis of data from a prospective study of 261 consecutive women of reproductive age attending a private clinic focused on the diagnosis and treatment of congenital uterine malformations. Reanalysis of the datasets was performed according to three different means of defining septate uterus: following the recommendations of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM), a 2016 update of those of the American Fertility Society from 1988 (ASRM-2016: internal fundal indentation depth ≥ 1.5 cm, angle of internal indentation < 90° and external indentation depth < 1 cm); following the recommendations of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology/European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESHRE/ESGE), published in 2013 and reaffirmed in 2016 (ESHRE/ESGE-2016: internal fundal/uterine indentation depth > 50% of uterine-wall thickness and external indentation depth < 50% of uterine-wall thickness, with uterine-wall thickness measured above interostial/intercornual line); and using a definition published last year which was based on the decision made most often by a group of experts (Congenital Uterine Malformation by Experts; CUME) (CUME-2018: internal fundal indentation depth ≥ 1 cm and external fundal indentation depth < 1 cm). We compared the rate of diagnosis of septate uterus using each of these three definitions and, for each, we estimated the association between the diagnosis and infertility and/or previous miscarriage, and anticipated the costs associated with their implementation using a guesstimation method.

RESULTS

Although 32.6% (85/261) of the subjects met the criteria for one of the three definitions of septate uterus, only 2.7% (7/261) of them were defined as having septate uterus according to all three definitions. We diagnosed significantly more cases of septate uterus using ESHRE/ESGE-2016 than using ASRM-2016 (31% vs 5%, relative risk (RR) = 6.7, P < 0.0001) or CUME-2018 (31% vs 12%, RR = 2.6, P < 0.0001) criteria. We also observed frequent cases that could not be classified definitively by ASRM-2016 (gray zone: neither normal/arcuate nor septate; 6.5%). There were no significant differences (P > 0.05) in the prevalence of septate uterus in women with vs those without infertility according to ASRM-2016 (5% vs 4%), ESHRE/ESGE-2016 (35% vs 28%) or CUME-2018 (11% vs 12%). Septate uterus was diagnosed significantly more frequently in women with vs those without previous miscarriage according to ASRM-2016 (11% vs 3%; P = 0.04) and CUME-2018 (22 vs 10%; P = 0.04), but not according to ESHRE/ESGE-2016 (42% vs 28%; P = 0.8) criteria. Our calculations showed that global costs to the healthcare system would be highly dependent on the criteria used in the clinical setting to define septate uterus, with the costs associated with the ESHRE/ESGE-2016 definition potentially being an extra US$ 100-200 billion over 5 years in comparison to ASRM-2016 and CUME-2018 definitions.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of septate uterus according to ESHRE/ESGE-2016, ASRM-2016 and CUME-2018 definitions differs considerably. An important limitation of the ASRM classification, which needs to be addressed, is the high proportion of unclassifiable cases originally named, by us, the 'gray zone'. The high rate of overdiagnosis of septate uterus according to ESHRE/ESGE-2016 may lead to unnecessary surgery and therefore unnecessary risk in these women and may impose a considerable financial burden on healthcare systems. Efforts to define clinically meaningful and universally applicable criteria for the diagnosis of septate uterus should be encouraged. Copyright © 2019 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Decision analysis about the cost-effectiveness of different in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer protocol under considering governments, hospitals, and patient

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to explore the benefits of in vitro fertilization (IVF) for patients and hospitals under different protocols and if IVF treatment should be incorporated into health care.

PERSPECTIVE

The government should consider including IVF treatment in health insurance. Hospitals and patients could obtain the best benefit by following the hospital's recommended protocol.

SETTING

This retrospective study was conducted from January 2014 to August 2017 at an academic hospital.

METHODS

A total of 7440 patients used gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists (GnRHa) protocol, 2619 patients used, gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonists (GnRHant) protocol, and 1514 patients used GnRHa ultra-long protocol. Primary outcomes were live birth rate (LBR), cost-effectiveness, hospital revenue, and government investment.

RESULTS

The cycle times for the GnRHa protocol and the GnRHa ultra-long protocol were significantly higher than the GnRHant protocol. Patients who were ≤29 years chose the GnRHant protocol. The cost of a successful cycle was 67,579.39 ± 9,917.55 ¥ and LBR was 29.25%. Patients who were >30 years had the GnRHa protocol as the dominant strategy, as it was more effective at lower costs and higher LBR. When patients were >30 to ≤34 years, the cost of a successful cycle was 66,556.7 ± 8,448.08 ¥ and the LBR was 31.05%. When patients were >35 years, the cost of a successful cycle was 83,297.92 ± 10,918.05 ¥ and the LBR was 25.07%. The government reimbursement for a cycle ranged between 11,372.12 ± 2,147.71 ¥ and 12,753.67 ± 1,905.02 ¥.

CONCLUSIONS

The government should consider including IVF treatment in health insurance. Hospitals recommend the GnRHant protocol for patients <29 years old and the GnRHa protocol for patients >30 years old, to obtain the best benefits. Patients could obtain the best benefit by using the protocol recommended by the hospital.

Is infertility a disease and does it matter?

Claims about whether or not infertility is a disease are sometimes invoked to defend or criticize the provision of state-funded treatment for infertility. In this paper, I suggest that this strategy is problematic. By exploring infertility through key approaches to disease in the philosophy of medicine, I show that there are deep theoretical disagreements regarding what subtypes of infertility qualify as diseases. Given that infertility's disease status remains unclear, one cannot uncontroversially justify or undermine its claim to medical treatment by claiming that it is or is not a disease. Instead of focusing on disease status, a preferable strategy to approach the debate about state-funded treatment is to explicitly address the specific ethical considerations raised by infertility. I show how this alternative strategy can be supported by a recent theoretical framework in the philosophy of medicine which avoids the problems associated with the concepts of health and disease.

Health Care Access, Costs, and Treatment Dynamics: Evidence from In Vitro Fertilization

We study public policies designed to improve access and reduce costs for in vitro fertilization (IVF). High out-of-pocket prices can deter potential patients from IVF, while active patients have an incentive to risk costly high-order pregnancies to improve their odds of treatment success. We analyze IVF's rich choice structure by estimating a dynamic model of patients' choices within and across treatments. Policy simulations show that insurance mandates for treatment or hard limits on treatment aggressiveness can improve access or costs, but not both. Insurance plus price-based incentives against risky treatment, however, can together improve patient welfare and reduce medical costs.

Cost-Benefit Analysis of Hysteroscopic Polypectomy Before Controlled Ovarian Hyperstimulation and Intrauterine Insemination in Infertile Women

OBJECTIVE

To examine the cost benefit of performing hysteroscopic polypectomy (HP) in infertile women with endometrial polyp(s) before controlled ovarian hyperstimulation with intrauterine insemination (COH/IUI).

STUDY DESIGN

Decision analytic model comparing costs and clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

HP and COH/IUI costs ranged from $537–$12,530 and $800–$7,600, respectively. Performing an HP before COH/IUI lowered fertility cost by $7,652 per clinical pregnancy. When COH/IUI costs remained constant, HP was most cost beneficial when the cost of HP was below a threshold value of $9,452. When HP costs remained constant, the threshold value at which HP was no longer cost beneficial was at COH/IUI costs below $704. The cost benefit was greatest when an office-based HP is performed.

CONCLUSION

HP before COH/IUI is more cost beneficial than fertility treatment alone, particularly when office-based hysteroscopy is performed.

Should uterus transplants be publicly funded?

Since 2000, 11 human uterine transplantation procedures (UTx) have been performed across Europe and Asia. Five of these have, to date, resulted in pregnancy and four live births have now been recorded. The most significant obstacles to the availability of UTx are presently scientific and technical, relating to the safety and efficacy of the procedure itself. However, if and when such obstacles are overcome, the most likely barriers to its availability will be social and financial in nature, relating in particular to the ability and willingness of patients, insurers or the state to pay. Thus, publicly funded healthcare systems such as the UK's National Health Service (NHS) will eventually have to decide whether UTx should be funded. With this in mind, we seek to provide an answer to the question of whether there exist any compelling reasons for the state not to fund UTx. The paper proceeds as follows. It assumes, at least for the sake of argument, that UTx will become sufficiently safe and cost-effective to be a candidate for funding and then asks, given that, what objections to funding there might be. Three main arguments are considered and ultimately rejected as providing insufficient reason to withhold funding for UTx. The first two are broad in their scope and offer an opportunity to reflect on wider issues about funding for infertility treatment in general. The third is narrower in scope and could, in certain forms, apply to UTx but not other assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs). The first argument suggests that UTx should not be publicly funded because doing so would be inconsistent with governments' obligations to prevent climate change and environmental pollution. The second claims that UTx does not treat a disorder and is not medically necessary. Finally, the third asserts that funding for UTx should be denied because of the availability of alternatives such as adoption and surrogacy.

ACCESS OF SINGLE WOMEN TO FERTILITY TREATMENT: A CASE OF INCIDENTAL DISCRIMINATION?

The purpose of this article is to evaluate the extent to which single women have access to publicly funded fertility treatment. It claims that, despite the fact that great progress has been made in removing gender inequalities in the area of assisted reproduction in England and Wales in recent years, there are points in the regulatory framework that still allow for discrimination against single women. The article builds on recent studies concerning the reforms brought about by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 (HFEA 2008). However, it focusses on publicly funded treatment, thus directing scholarly attention away from the controversies over the amended s 13(5) HFEA 1990. It argues that the primary reason for remaining inequalities can be traced back to (a) the limitations of the current legislative framework; (b) the ambiguities inherent in the regulatory framework, which in the context of publicly funded fertility treatment is determined by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence clinical guidelines and Clinical Commissioning Groups and Health Boards' resource allocation policies; and (c) the remaining confusion about the relationship between 'welfare of the child' assessments and eligibility criteria in National Health Service rationing decisions. The article argues that the current regulation does not go far enough in acknowledging the inability of single women to conceive naturally, but at the same time that it struggles to address the fluidity of contemporary familial relationships. The analysis presents an opportunity to contribute to debates about the role of law in shaping the scope of reproductive autonomy, gender equality and social justice.

Optimal timing for elective egg freezing

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the optimal age to pursue elective oocyte cryopreservation.

DESIGN

A decision-tree model was constructed to determine the success and cost-effectiveness of oocyte preservation versus no action when considered at ages 25-40 years, assuming an attempt at procreation 3, 5, or 7 years after initial decision.

SETTING

Not applicable.

PATIENT(S)

Hypothetical patients 25-40 years old presenting to discuss elective oocyte cryopreservation.

INTERVENTION(S)

Decision to cryopreserve oocytes from age 25 years to age 40 years versus taking no action.

MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURE(S)

Probability of live birth after initial decision whether or not to cryopreserve oocytes.

RESULT(S)

Oocyte cryopreservation provided the greatest improvement in probability of live birth compared with no action (51.6% vs. 21.9%) when performed at age 37 years. The highest probability of live birth was seen when oocyte cryopreservation was performed at ages <34 years (>74%), although little benefit over no action was seen at ages 25-30 years (2.6%-7.1% increase). Oocyte cryopreservation was most cost-effective at age 37 years, at $28,759 per each additional live birth in the oocyte cryopreservation group. When the probability of marriage was included, oocyte cryopreservation resulted in little improvement in live birth rates.

CONCLUSION(S)

Oocyte cryopreservation can be of great benefit to specific women and has the highest chance of success when performed at an earlier age. At age 37 years, oocyte cryopreservation has the largest benefit over no action and is most cost-effective.

Infertility care and the introduction of new reproductive technologies in poor resource settings

BACKGROUND

The overall prevalence of infertility was estimated to be 3.5-16.7% in developing countries and 6.9-9.3% in developed countries. Furthermore, according to reports from some regions of sub-Saharan Africa, the prevalence rate is 30-40%. The consequences of infertility and how it affects the lives of women in poor-resource settings, particularly in developing countries, has become an important issue to be discussed in reproductive health. In some societies, the inability to fulfill the desire to have children makes life difficult for the infertile couple. In many regions, infertility is considered a tragedy that affects not only the infertile couple or woman, but the entire family.

METHODS

This is a position paper which encompasses a review of the needs of low-income infertile couples, mainly those living in developing countries, regarding access to infertility care, including ART and initiatives to provide ART at low or affordable cost. Information was gathered from the databases MEDLINE, CENTRAL, POPLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, and ICTRP with the key words: infertility, low income, assisted reproductive technologies, affordable cost, low cost.

RESULTS

There are few initiatives geared toward implementing ART procedures at low cost or at least at affordable cost in low-income populations. Nevertheless, from recent studies, possibilities have emerged for new low-cost initiatives that can help millions of couples to achieve the desire of having a biological child.

CONCLUSIONS

It is necessary for healthcare professionals and policymakers to take into account these new initiatives in order to implement ART in resource-constrained settings.

Use of fertility treatment modalities in a large United States cohort of professional women

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the use of fertility treatments among a large cohort of women in the United States.

DESIGN

Cohort study.

SETTING

Nurses' Health Study II.

PATIENT(S)

Ten thousand thirty-six women who reported having used fertility treatment on biennial questionnaires from 1993-2009.

INTERVENTION(S)

None.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Data on patterns of treatment modality were collected via self-report from validated mailed questionnaires. Information on clomiphene, gonadotropin injections alone, and gonadotropin injections as part of intrauterine insemination (IUI) and in vitro fertilization (IVF) was queried.

RESULT(S)

Most women who reported fertility treatment used clomiphene (94%), with a large majority reporting clomiphene as their only form of treatment (73%). Of women who reported treatment more advanced than clomiphene, 13% had used gonadotropin injections alone, 11% IUI treatment, and 11% IVF. Several subgroups were more likely to use multiple treatment modalities and to initiate treatment with gonadotropins rather than clomiphene, including women living in states with insurance coverage of fertility procedures, with higher household income, younger in age, who remained nulliparous at the study close, and treated after 2000.

CONCLUSION(S)

Results should be interpreted cautiously, but to our knowledge, this represents the first study of fertility treatment patterns in the United States and could inform public health planning.

Optimising the management of patients with infertility

The main causes of infertility are female factor (anovulation, tubal damage, endometriosis and ovarian failure), male factor (low or absent numbers of motile sperm in the ejaculate, and erectile dysfunction), or unexplained infertility. More than 80% of couples will conceive within one year if the woman is aged under 40 and they have regular sexual intercourse. Of those who fail to conceive in the first year, around half will do so in the second year, giving a cumulative pregnancy rate > 90%. A woman of reproductive age who has not conceived after a year of regular sexual intercourse, and has no known cause of infertility, should be offered referral for further clinical assessment and investigation with her partner. Women who have a BMI > or = 30 are likely to take longer to conceive. Those with a BMI < 19 who have irregular or absent menstruation should be advised that putting on weight is likely to improve their chance of conception. The best test of ovulation is an appropriately timed mid-luteal serum progesterone level. Women with irregular or absent menstrual cycles should be offered a blood test to measure serum gonadotrophin levels (FSH and LH). Women with no known comorbidities should be screened for tubal occlusion. Those who are thought to have comorbidities should be offered laparoscopy and dye testing.

Diagnosis and treatment of diminished ovarian reserve in assisted reproductive technology cycles of women up to age 40 years: the role of insurance mandates

OBJECTIVE

To explore correlates of diminished ovarian reserve (DOR) and predictors of assisted reproductive technologies (ART) treatment outcome in DOR cycles using the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technologies-Clinical Outcomes Reporting System (SART-CORS) database; we hypothesized that mandated state insurance coverage for ART is associated with the prevalence of DOR diagnosis in ART cycles and with treatment outcomes in DOR cycles.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study using ART cycles between 2004 and 2007.

SETTING

Not applicable.

PATIENT(S)

A total of 182,779 fresh, nondonor, initial ART cycles in women up to age 40 years.

INTERVENTION(S)

None.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Prevalence of DOR and elevated FSH, odds ratio of DOR and elevated FSH in ART mandated vs. nonmandated states, live birth rates.

RESULT(S)

Compared with cycles performed in states with mandated ART coverage, cycles in states with no ART mandate were more likely to have DOR (adjusted odds ratio 1.43, 95% confidence interval 1.37-1.5) or elevated FSH (adjusted odds ratio 1.69, 95% confidence interval 1.56-1.85) as the sole reason for treatment. Lack of mandated ART coverage was associated with increased live birth rates in cycles diagnosed as DOR, but not in cycles characterized only by an elevated FSH.

CONCLUSION(S)

A significant association was observed between lack of mandated insurance for ART and the proportion of cycles treating DOR or elevated FSH. The presence or absence of state-mandated ART coverage could impact access to care and the mix of patients that pursue and initiate ART cycles in ways that influence these proportions. Additional studies are needed that consider the coalescence of insurance mandates, patient and provider factors, and state-level variables on the odds of specific infertility diagnoses and treatment prognosis.

Balancing selected medication costs with total number of daily injections: a preference analysis of GnRH-agonist and antagonist protocols by IVF patients

BACKGROUND

During in vitro fertilization (IVF), fertility patients are expected to self-administer many injections as part of this treatment. While newer medications have been developed to substantially reduce the number of these injections, such agents are typically much more expensive. Considering these differences in both cost and number of injections, this study compared patient preferences between GnRH-agonist and GnRH-antagonist based protocols in IVF.

METHODS

Data were collected by voluntary, anonymous questionnaire at first consultation appointment. Patient opinion concerning total number of s.c. injections as a function of non-reimbursed patient cost associated with GnRH-agonist [A] and GnRH-antagonist [B] protocols in IVF was studied.

RESULTS

Completed questionnaires (n = 71) revealed a mean +/- SD patient age of 34 +/- 4.1 yrs. Most (83.1%) had no prior IVF experience; 2.8% reported another medical condition requiring self-administration of subcutaneous medication(s). When out-of-pocket cost for [A] and [B] were identical, preference for [B] was registered by 50.7% patients. The tendency to favor protocol [B] was weaker among patients with a health occupation. Estimated patient costs for [A] and [B] were $259.82 +/- 11.75 and $654.55 +/- 106.34, respectively (p < 0.005). Measured patient preference for [B] diminished as the cost difference increased.

CONCLUSIONS

This investigation found consistently higher non-reimbursed direct medication costs for GnRH-antagonist IVF vs. GnRH-agonist IVF protocols. A conditional preference to minimize downregulation (using GnRH-antagonist) was noted among some, but not all, IVF patient sub-groups. Compared to IVF patients with a health occupation, the preference for GnRH-antagonist was weaker than for other patients. While reducing total number of injections by using GnRH-antagonist is a desirable goal, it appears this advantage is not perceived equally by all IVF patients and its utility is likely discounted heavily by patients when nonreimbursed medication costs reach a critical level.

The sharing of eggs by infertile women who are trying to conceive themselves with an egg recipient for financial advantages does not jeopardize the donor's chance of conceiving

PURPOSE

To determine if the sharing of oocytes by an infertile woman with an egg recipient for financial advantages has any negative impact on the success rate for the donor.

METHODS

A matched controlled study was performed comparing pregnancy outcome of women undergoing in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET) but sharing half of their eggs with a recipient vs women undergoing IVF-ET but not sharing oocytes.

RESULTS

Even though more women sharing oocytes deferred fresh transfer and cryopreserved the embryos because of a greater likelihood of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome, there was no difference in pregnancy rates between the two groups after their first embryo transfer whether it was with fresh or frozen-thawed embryos.

CONCLUSIONS

Sharing of oocytes by a woman undergoing IVF-ET does not jeopardize her chance of a successful outcome following embryo transfer.

Economic implications of insurance coverage for in vitro fertilization in the United States. A review

OBJECTIVE

To analyze cost-effectiveness studies in regard to the costs of in vitro fertilization (IVF) and discuss specific economic trends that may affect the future utilization of IVF in the United States.

STUDY DESIGN

Health economics. A Pub Med literature review and the Centers for Disease Control's (CDC) Fertility Clinic Success Rate registry served to access cost analyses and trends, respectively.

RESULTS

The average cost of an IVF cycle in the U.S. is $9,226. Among policies that provide IVF services, the increase in premium per month ranges from $0.67 to $14.

CONCLUSION

When IVF is provided as a health benefit, the cost increases can be variable. As utilization increases, contemporary cost analyses and outcomes research will aid providers, third-party payers and policymakers in better understanding the economic impact of lVF.

[Clinical reports on IVF cycle rank--reliability and validity]

BACKGROUND

Accurate clinical reports of in vitro fertilization cycle rank (IVF-CR] are important because of their predictive value of treatment success--clinical pregnancy. This parameter, therefore, facilitates decision-making on both individual and population levels. The District of Haifa and Western GaLilee currently enrolls about 700,000 insured people, and provides hundreds of IVF cycles (pick-ups and frozen-thawed) at a cost of millions of shekels each year. Hence, accurate reports of IVF cycle rank is extremely important in order to ensure that public funds are actually directed to couples who may benefit from them.

OBJECTIVE

The study objective was to evaluate the accuracy of IVF units' reports of IVF-CR.

METHODS

Reports of IVF-CR from local IVF units were correlated with administrative data. Couples undergoing IVF treatments during one month were included in the study.

RESULTS

A total number of 108 IVF cycle treatments were reported. Accurate IVF-CR was reported for 29 patients (27%), "too high" for 30 patients (28%), and "too low" for 10 (9%). For 39 patients (36%) data was missing.

CONCLUSIONS

CLinicaL reports of IVF-CR are currently accurate in less than a third of the cases. It is recommended that national regulatory bodies should issue compulsory guidelines in relation to recording and reporting of IVF-CR.

Clomifene citrate or unstimulated intrauterine insemination compared with expectant management for unexplained infertility: pragmatic randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of clomifene citrate and unstimulated intrauterine insemination with expectant management for the treatment of unexplained infertility.

DESIGN

Three arm parallel group, pragmatic randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

Four teaching hospitals and a district general hospital in Scotland.

PARTICIPANTS

Couples with infertility for over two years, confirmed ovulation, patent fallopian tubes, and motile sperm.

INTERVENTION

Expectant management, oral clomifene citrate, and unstimulated intrauterine insemination.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was live birth. Secondary outcome measures included clinical pregnancy, multiple pregnancy, miscarriage, and acceptability.

RESULTS

580 women were randomised to expectant management (n=193), oral clomifene citrate (n=194), or unstimulated intrauterine insemination (n=193) for six months. The three randomised groups were comparable in terms of age, body mass index, duration of infertility, sperm concentration, and motility. Live birth rates were 32/193 (17%), 26/192 (14%), and 43/191 (23%), respectively. Compared with expectant management, the odds ratio for a live birth was 0.79 (95% confidence interval 0.45 to 1.38) after clomifene citrate and 1.46 (0.88 to 2.43) after unstimulated intrauterine insemination. More women randomised to clomifene citrate (159/170, 94%) and unstimulated intrauterine insemination (155/162, 96%) found the process of treatment acceptable than those randomised to expectant management (123/153, 80%) (P=0.001 and P<0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSION

In couples with unexplained infertility existing treatments such as empirical clomifene and unstimulated intrauterine insemination are unlikely to offer superior live birth rates compared with expectant management.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCT No: 71762042.

The combined effect of age and basal follicle-stimulating hormone on the cost of a live birth at assisted reproductive technology

OBJECTIVE

To predict the cost of a delivery following assisted reproductive technologies (ART).

DESIGN

Cost analysis based on retrospective chart analysis.

SETTING

University-based ART program.

PATIENT(S)

Women aged >or=26 and <or=42 years with FSH levels <or=12 IU/L on day 3 undergoing a first cycle of fresh, nondonor ART.

INTERVENTION(S)

Logit regression using a fractional polynomial model of age and basal FSH was used to estimate the probability of a live birth. Cost analysis was applied to the resulting prediction.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

The predicted probability of a live birth following ART based on a woman's age and FSH and the associated cost of a live birth.

RESULT(S)

Analysis of 1,238 first ART cycles produced a prediction model for live birth rates following ART incorporating both age and FSH. A cost analysis based upon combination of age and FSH revealed the cost of a live birth exceeded $100,000 when the probability of a live birth fell below 15% and the cost rose exponentially at lower probabilities of live birth.

CONCLUSIONS(S)

Based upon a woman's age and FSH and expected cost for a live birth using ART may be calculated. At live birth rates <5%, the cost of ART is high and greatly exceeds the cost of donor cycles. This information is vital for patient counseling.

Utilization of infertility services: how much does money matter?

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the effects of financial access and other individual characteristics on the likelihood that a woman pursues infertility treatment and the choice of treatment type.

DATA SOURCE/STUDY SETTING

The 1995 National Survey of Family Growth.

STUDY DESIGN

We use a binomial logit model to estimate the effects of financial access and individual characteristics on the likelihood that a woman pursues infertility treatment. We then use a multinomial logit model to estimate the differential effects of these variables across treatment types.

DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHOD

This study analyzes the subset of 1,210 women who meet the definition of infertile or subfecund from the 1995 National Survey of Family Growth.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

We find that income, insurance coverage, age, and parity (number of previous births) all significantly affect the probability of seeking infertility treatment; however, the effect of these variables on choice of treatment type varies significantly. Neither income nor insurance influences the probability of seeking advice, a relatively low cost, low yield treatment. At the other end of the spectrum, the choice to pursue assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs)-a much more expensive but potentially more productive option-is highly influenced by income, but merely having private insurance has no significant effect. In the middle of the spectrum are treatment options such as testing, surgery, and medications, for which "financial access" increases their probability of selection.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results illustrate that for the sample of infertile of subfecund women of childbearing age studied, and considering their options, financial access to infertility treatment does matter.

Productivity Losses Attributable to Untreated Chlamydial Infection and Associated Pelvic Inflammatory Disease in Reproductive-Aged Women

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The productivity losses attributable to disease-related morbidity and mortality impose a burden on society in general and on employers in particular. A reliable assessment of the productivity losses associated with untreated infection with Chlamydia trachomatis (Ct) would complement earlier work on direct medical costs and contribute to an estimate of the full cost of chlamydial disease.

GOAL

The goal of this study was to estimate the discounted lifetime productivity losses attributable to untreated chlamydial infection in reproductive-aged women.

STUDY DESIGN

We developed a cost model using Monte Carlo methods to estimate the lifetime discounted productivity losses attributable to untreated lower genital tract Ct infection among reproductive-aged women. The model considered the impact of disability resulting from acute pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) associated with untreated Ct infection and from the sequelae of acute PID, including chronic pelvic pain, ectopic pregnancy, and infertility. To accommodate disparate Ct infection rates and labor market characteristics across age groups, we matched age-based risk factors for Ct infection with labor market patterns. Data sources included the 2001 National Chlamydia Surveillance Data, the 2001 Current Population Survey, and published literature.

RESULTS

Estimates indicate that the mean weighted productivity losses per untreated Ct infection were approximately US dollars 130 (in year 2001 dollars). Mean weighted productivity losses per case of acute PID were estimated at US dollars 649. Estimated productivity losses were highly correlated with age, reflecting age-dependent differences in labor market characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

The productivity losses attributable to untreated infection with Ct and to sequelae of this infection form a substantial portion of the total economic burden of disease. Effective programs to prevent chlamydial infection and effective screening, diagnosis, and treatment of Ct-infected women may reduce productivity losses and substantially lessen the economic burden of disease to employers.

Recombinant versus highly-purified, urinary follicle-stimulating hormone (r-FSH vs. HP-uFSH) in ovulation induction: a prospective, randomized study with cost-minimization analysis

BACKGROUND

Both recombinant FSH (r-FSH) and highly-purified, urinary FSH (HP-uFSH) are frequently used in ovulation induction associated with timed sexual intercourse. Their effectiveness is reported to be similar, and therefore the costs of treatment represent a major issue to be considered. Although several studies about costs in IVF have been published, data obtained in low-technology infertility treatments are still scarce.

METHODS

Two hundred and sixty infertile women (184 with unexplained infertility, 76 with CC-resistant polycystic ovary syndrome) at their first treatment cycle were randomized and included in the study. Ovulation induction was accomplished by daily administration of rFSH or HP-uFSH according to a low-dose, step-up regimen aimed to obtain a monofollicular ovulation. A bi- or tri-follicular ovulation was anyway accepted, whereas hCG was withdrawn and the cycle cancelled when more than three follicles greater than or equal to 18 mm diameter were seen at ultrasound. The primary outcome measure was the cost of therapy per delivered baby, estimated according to a cost-minimization analysis. Secondary outcomes were the following: monofollicular ovulation rate, total FSH dose, cycle cancellation rate, length of the follicular phase, number of developing follicles (>12 mm diameter), endometrial thickness at hCG, incidence of twinning and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome, delivery rate.

RESULTS

The overall FSH dose needed to achieve ovulation was significantly lower with r-FSH, whereas all the other studied variables did not significantly differ with either treatments. However, a trend toward a higher delivery rate with r-FSH was observed in the whole group and also when results were considered subgrouping patients according to the indication to treatment.

CONCLUSION

Considering the significantly lower number of vials/patient and the slight (although non-significant) increase in the delivery rate with r-FSH, the cost-minimization analysis showed a 9.4% reduction in the overall therapy cost per born baby in favor of r-FSH.

Health disparities and infertility: impacts of state-level insurance mandates

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether important racial, ethnic, or socioeconomic status (SES) health disparities exist in infertility, impaired fecundity, or infertility treatment.

DESIGN

Four waves of the National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG) were pooled. Measures were compared across various race/ethnicity, education, and age groups.

PARTICIPANT(S)

Data for 31,047 women 15-44 years old from the NSFG were pooled.

INTERVENTION(S)

Outcomes were compared by whether the women's states of residence had a mandate in place (at least 1 year before the interview) to compel insurers to cover or offer to cover infertility treatment.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Infertility status, impaired fecundity, ever having sought infertility treatment.

RESULT(S)

Infertility is more common for non-Hispanic black women, non-Hispanic other race women, and Hispanic women than for non-Hispanic white women, and both infertility and impaired fecundity are more common for high school dropouts and high school graduates with no college than for 4-year college graduates, and for older women compared with women 29 and younger. Older women, non-Hispanic white women, and women who are more educated (with at least some college) are more likely to have ever received treatment. No evidence has been found that the racial, ethnic, or education disparities are ameliorated by the health insurance mandates.

CONCLUSION(S)

Racial, ethnic, and educational disparities exist in infertility status and treatment, and educational disparities in impaired fecundity. More study of the impact of infertility treatment mandates on these disparities is needed.

Socioeconomic and racial disparities among infertility patients seeking care

OBJECTIVE

To examine sociodemographic differences based on patient race/ethnicity among infertility patients seeking care in a state with mandated coverage of infertility treatment.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey.

SETTING

University-hospital-based fertility center.

PATIENT(S)

A total of 1,500 consecutive women who presented for infertility care.

INTERVENTION(S)

None.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Self-report questionnaire assessing patient race/ethnicity, diagnosis, income, education level, and duration of infertility before seeking care.

RESULT(S)

African American women experienced a significantly longer duration of infertility before seeking care compared with Caucasian women (4.3 vs. 3.3 years, respectively; P=.03). With regard to infertility diagnosis, a significantly greater proportion of African American and Hispanic women had tubal factor infertility compared with Caucasian women (24.0% and 27.3% vs. 5.3%, respectively; P=.001). Looking at the highest level of education attained by patients, a significantly greater proportion of African American and Hispanic women had less than a 4-year college degree compared with Caucasian women (48% and 40.9% vs. 13.2%, respectively; P<.001). Examining the gross annual household income of patients, a significantly greater proportion of African American and Hispanic women had household incomes below $100,000 compared with Caucasian women (72% and 68.2% vs. 37.3%, respectively; P<.01).

CONCLUSION(S)

African American women are more likely to seek infertility treatment after a longer duration of failed conception compared with Caucasian women. Furthermore, African American, and Hispanic women are more likely to have tubal factor infertility, a lower education level, and a lower household income compared with Caucasian women.

Comparison of assisted reproductive technology utilization and outcomes between Caucasian and African American patients in an equal-access-to-care setting

OBJECTIVE

Racial disparity in assisted reproductive technology (ART) outcomes has been reported but remains controversial. Reasons for the disparity are unclear, and access to care has been suggested as a causative factor. In this study, we sought to examine minority utilization of ART in the Department of Defense (DoD) compared with minority utilization in the U.S. ART population. Outcomes from ART were compared between Caucasian (Cau) and African American (AA) patients, and etiologies of disparity were examined.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

University-based ART program.

PATIENT(S)

A total of 1,457 patients undergoing first-cycle fresh, nondonor ART.

INTERVENTION(S)

None.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Clinical pregnancy rate, live birth rate, implantation rate, spontaneous abortion rate.

RESULT(S)

Within the DoD population, AA women had a fourfold increase in utilization of ART services relative to the U.S. ART population. In this equal-access-to-care setting, AA women experienced a clinically significant decrease in live birth rate that did not reach statistical significance (29.6% vs. 35.8%, risk ratio [RR] 0.83, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67-1.02) and a statistically significant increase in spontaneous abortions compared with Cau women (25% vs. 15.9%, RR 1.57, 95% CI 1.05-2.36). This might be explained, in part, by a higher prevalence of uterine leiomyomas in AA women (30.8% AA vs. 10.7% Cau, RR 2.85, 95% CI 2.06-3.95). For both AA and Cau women, the presence of fibroids at baseline ultrasound was associated with reductions in clinical pregnancy rates (35% with leiomyomas vs. 43.2% without leiomyomas, RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.51-0.98), live birth rates (26.2% vs. 36.0%, RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.44-0.90), and implantation rates (25.6% vs. 31.1% RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.69-0.98).

CONCLUSION(S)

Utilization of ART services among AA women increased when access to care was improved. A clinically significant reduction in live birth rate and statistically significant increase in spontaneous abortion rate was observed in AA women compared with Cau women. Leiomyomas were three times more prevalent in AA women and reduced ART success, regardless of race. The persistence of racial differences in an equal-access-to-care environment might be explained, in part, by the increased prevalence of leiomyomas in AA women.

Comparison of outcomes and direct cost between minimal stimulation and conventional protocols on ovarian stimulation in in vitro fertilization

AIM

To determine whether minimal stimulation with clomiphene and gonadotropin provides outcomes and direct costs comparable with those of a conventional GnRHa-gonadotropin stimulation protocol for infertile patients undergoing in vitro fertilization.

METHODS

A non-randomized clinical trial was conducted from 1 July 1996 to 31 March 2003 at the Infertility and Assisted Reproductive Unit, Ramathibodi Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Mahidol University, Thailand. A total of 192 patients were recruited of whom 96 cases underwent ovarian stimulated cycles with minimal stimulation protocol, and 96 controls underwent ovarian stimulated cycles with GnRHa-gonadotropin protocol, with cases and controls matched for age and infertility cause.

RESULTS

The median patient age was 35 years. Endometriosis was the most frequent infertility cause (28.1%). The conventional GnRHa-gonadotropin protocol could give more oocyte numbers than the minimal stimulation protocol (7.3 +/- 4.9 vs 4.5 +/- 3.3 oocytes). The fertilization rate and cleavage rate were similar (73.4 +/- 31.9 and 84.9 +/- 32.6 in minimal stimulation protocol, 69.3 +/- 29.6 and 88.4 +/- 28.0 in GnRHa-gonadotropin protocol, respectively). The pregnancy rate per oocyte retrieval cycle in the GnRHa-gonadotropin protocol was similar to the minimal stimulation protocol. (13.1%vs 13.0%, P = 1.000). However, the cost per pregnancy of minimal stimulation protocol was less than that of GnRHa-gonadotropin protocol. (6021.95 US dollars for minimal stimulation protocol per pregnancy, 10,785.65 US dollars for GnRHa-gonadotropin protocol per pregnancy, P < 0.000).

CONCLUSION

Minimal stimulation was less effective than conventional GnRHa-gonadotropin on the ovarian stimulation. However, the total costs of minimal stimulation were cheaper than the conventional GnRHa-gonadotropin protocol. The decreased costs of minimal stimulation justifies further evaluation of its role in the treatment of infertility in selected cases.

In vitro fertilization (IVF) versus gonadotropins followed by IVF as treatment for primary infertility: a cost-based decision analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the economic consequences of proceeding directly to IVF to those of proceeding with gonadotropins followed by IVF in patients <35 years of age with unexplained infertility.

DESIGN

A decision-tree model. The model incorporated the cost and success of each infertility regimen as well as the pregnancy-associated costs of singleton or multiple gestations and the risk and cost of cerebral palsy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Cost per live birth.

RESULT(S)

Both treatment arms resulted in a >80% chance of birth. The gonadotropin arm was over four times more likely to result in a high-order multiple pregnancy (HOMP). Despite this, when the base case estimates were utilized, immediate IVF emerged as more costly per live birth. In sensitivity analysis, immediate IVF became less costly per live birth when IVF was more likely to achieve birth (55.1%) or cheaper (11,432 dollars) than our base case assumptions.

CONCLUSION(S)

After considering the risk and cost of HOMP, immediate IVF is more costly per live birth than a trial of gonadotropins prior to IVF.

Diagnosing infertility in a district general hospital: a case-note and cost analysis

This study aimed to observe diagnostic work-up and cost evaluation of infertile couples to identify opportunities for improvement. One hundred and seventy-four new referrals to the gynaecology clinic in a District General Hospital during 1996 and 1997 provided the cohort for analysis. Data from case notes were transferred on to data collection sheets. Data were inputted into SPSS for analysis. Primary infertility accounted for 62% of couples. One hundred and forty-two couples (81.6%) had a definitive diagnosis, and the analyses relate to these couples only. There was no single investigation performed on the whole cohort studied. Semen analysis was undertaken in 80.3% of the couples; couples with suspected male infertility were over four times more likely to have had more than two semen tests (P = 0.0005); 77.5% of couples had FSH and LH tests; and midluteal progesterone was tested in 76.1%. An increased intensity of FSH-LH hormone testing was associated with couples with anovulation (chi(2) = 6.79, P = 0.03). Serial repeat progesterone tended to be given to women with irregular or prolonged cycles (35 days or more), although this tendency was not statistically significant. The most common test for tubal patency was hysterosalpingography. Higher costs are generally associated with diagnosing endometriosis and tubal factor because of the relatively high cost of laparoscopy. The average cost of diagnosis for each patient was pound 365 and ranged from pound 64 to pound 851. In conclusion, a standard protocol of basic investigative procedures should be offered in secondary centres to all couples. Avoiding duplication and unnecessary investigations (for example, serial progesterone) may reduce costs, although offering all couples a standard protocol of tests would probably offset this observation.

Disparities in access to infertility services in a state with mandated insurance coverage

The objective of our study was to examine the demographic and socioeconomic characteristics of patients accessing infertility services in a state (Massachusetts) with mandated and comprehensive insurance coverage for such services. Even in a state with such insurance coverage, disparities in access to infertility services exist, with the majority of individuals accessing those services being Caucasian, highly educated, and wealthy.

Investigation of the infertile couple: a basic fertility work-up performed within 12 months of trying to conceive generates costs and complications for no particular benefit

The current approach of the basic fertility work-up has been questioned recently in this journal. Based on new data on human fecundity, the authors advocated starting the fertility work-up after just 6 months of trying to conceive instead of the usual 12 months. In women younger than 39 years and with a regular cycle, there are several arguments why the basic fertility work-up should not be done earlier than after 12 months of child wish. Firstly, 50% of couples who have tried to conceive for 6 months without success will conceive in the next 6 months without any treatment. Secondly, the prevalence of fertility diseases is lower in couples who have been trying to conceive for 6 months as compared with those who have been trying for 12 months. Performance of a fertility work-up at this stage will lead to an increase in false-positive diagnoses compared with performing them at 12 months of subfertility. Thirdly, fertility treatment will have fewer additional effects in couples with good spontaneous conception prospects (6-12 months child wish), compared with subfertile couples who have poor prospects. At present, none of the available fertility treatments have success rates comparable with no intervention in these women, and postponement of treatment in such couples will prevent complications such as ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome and multiple pregnancies. We argue that the fertility work-up should not be offered to couples with a duration of child wish of <12 months, except for women with ovulation disorders and women of 39 years and older.

Cost-effectiveness of Chlamydia antibody tests in subfertile women

BACKGROUND

For the evaluation of tubal function, Chlamydia antibody testing (CAT) has been introduced as a screening test. We compared six CAT screening strategies (five CAT tests and one combination of tests), with respect to their cost-effectiveness, by using IVF pregnancy rate as outcome measure.

METHODS

A decision analytic model was developed based on a source population of 1715 subfertile women. The model incorporates hysterosalpingography (HSG), laparoscopy and IVF. To calculate IVF pregnancy rates, costs, effects, cost-effectiveness and incremental costs per effect of the six different CAT screening strategies were determined.

RESULTS

pELISA Medac turned out to be the most cost-effective CAT screening strategy (15 075 per IVF pregnancy), followed by MIF Anilabsystems (15 108). A combination of tests (pELISA Medac and MIF Anilabsystems; 15 127) did not improve the cost-effectiveness of the single strategies. Sensitivity analyses showed that the results are robust for changes in the baseline values of the model parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

Only small differences were found between the screening strategies regarding the cost-effectiveness, although pELISA Medac was the most cost-effective strategy. Before introducing a particular CAT test into clinical practice, one should consider the effects and consequences of the entire screening strategy, instead of only the diagnostic accuracy of the test used.

[In vitro oocyte maturation for safer treatment of infertility. The risk of ovarian overstimulation syndrome is minimized]

Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome is a well known side effect of hormone stimulation in assisted reproduction. New treatments using minimal amounts of gonadotropins or no hormone supplementation may reduce this risk. In-vitro maturation (IVM) is a treatment where final oocyte maturation is achieved in the laboratory. Results have been acceptable and this method may provide a low-risk and cost-effective alternative to traditional IVF. IVM would thus avoid the high amounts of exogenous gonadotropins required for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation. Currently, only a few teams internationally are pursuing research in this field of human reproduction. IVM is a promising treatment alternative and can be recommended especially for patients at risk of developing ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome.

Inconceivable? Deducting the costs of fertility treatment

This Article considers whether infertile taxpayers can deduct their fertility treatment costs as medical expenses under Internal Revenue Code section 213 and whether they should be able to deduct them. Internal Revenue Code section 213 defines medical expenses as "amounts paid-for the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease, or for the purpose of affecting any structure or function of the body." This definition is interpreted by reference to a baseline of normal biological functioning, which includes reproductive functioning. Most people conceive and bear children without having to incur expenses for fertility treatment. Expenses incurred to approximate the baseline of normal reproductive health are deductible, even if the taxpayer winds up better off, with a child, after the fertility treatment. The medical profession recognizes that infertility is a disease or condition. Infertility is a loss, just as a broken leg is a loss. Fertility treatment costs are thus medical expenses under section 213. In addition, given the existence of the medical expense deduction, taxpayers should be able to deduct the cost of fertility treatments, including IVF, egg donor, and surrogate procedures, under either an "ability-to-pay" or consequentialist normative approach. Reproduction is extremely important to most people. In addition, allowing taxpayers to deduct the costs of fertility treatment will encourage infertile taxpayers to elect the most effective treatment option and reduce the rate of risky multifetal pregnancies. This Article concludes that fertility treatment costs are deductible as medical expenses under current law and should be deductible as medical expenses.

Ovulation induction with urinary FSH or recombinant FSH in polycystic ovary syndrome patients: a prospective randomized analysis of cost-effectiveness

The aim of this prospective, randomized trial was to compare the clinical results and the cost-effectiveness of urinary FSH (uFSH) and recombinant FSH (rFSH) in ovarian stimulation for intrauterine insemination (IUI) cycles in polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) patients. One-hundred and seventy PCOS infertile patients undergoing IUI were enrolled, and protocols of ovarian stimulation with uFSH or rFSH were randomly assigned. The total number of cycles performed was 379 (182 and 197, respectively). The main outcome measures were the number of mature follicles, the days of stimulation, the number of ampoules and IU used per cycle, the biochemical/clinical pregnancy rates, the number of multiple pregnancies and the cost-effectiveness. No statistically significant differences were found in the follicular development, length of stimulation, pregnancy rates, delivery rates and multiple pregnancies between the two groups. In the uFSH group, the cost per cycle remained significantly lower (218.51 +/- 88.69 versus 312.22 +/- 118.12; P < 0.0001), even though a significantly higher number of IU of gonadotrophins were used (809.3 +/- 271.9 versus 589.1 +/- 244.7; P < 0.0001). The cost-effectiveness (i. e. within a group, the total cost of all cycles divided by no. of clinical pregnancies) was 1729.08 in the uFSH group and 3075.37 in the rFSH group. In conclusion, uFSH and rFSH demonstrated the same effectiveness in ovarian stimulation in IUI cycles in PCOS patients. The urinary preparation is more cost-effective due to the difference of its cost per IU.

Economic evaluation of infertility treatment for tubal disease

PURPOSE

The number of published studies comparing cost-effectiveness of tubal surgery and IVF treatment is limited, in part because of the difficulties of conducting randomized trials, given that IVF is now a clinically accepted treatment and the decision to offer surgery or IVF is often dictated by the severity of the tubal disease and by the availability of the methods. The aim of this study was to compare the costs of our policy of offering tubal surgery to patients with mild or moderate tubal disease with the cost of offering IVF to these and severe tubal disease.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study patients with tubal pathology as the sole reason for their infertility were included: 61 patients in the tubal surgery group and 464 patients in the IVF group. The delivery rates and costs per delivery were compared.

RESULTS

Delivery rates were 28% in the tubal surgery group within 2 years of follow-up and 52% in the IVF group that involved up to three cycles of treatment. This economic evaluation demonstrated only small differences in the average cost when considering the cost per delivery.

CONCLUSIONS

With a policy involving strict selection of patients, tubal surgery will continue to have a role in the treatment of infertility.

A refined estimate of the average lifetime cost of pelvic inflammatory disease

BACKGROUND

The major complications of pelvic inflammatory disease (infertility, ectopic pregnancy, and chronic pelvic pain) are the leading cause of non-HIV sexually transmitted disease morbidity in the United States.

GOAL

The goal of the study was to estimate a plausible range for the average lifetime cost of pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) and its major complications in a cohort of U.S. women of reproductive age.

STUDY DESIGN

We developed a state-transition computer-based model to simulate the natural history of PID, incorporating the severity of infection, number of recurrent episodes, treatment setting, and the risk over time of major complications. Clinical and cost data were from the published literature. Model outcomes included life expectancy, quality-adjusted life expectancy, and lifetime costs.

RESULTS

In a cohort of 100,000 females acquiring PID between 20 and 24 years of age, 8550 ectopic pregnancies, 16,800 cases of infertility, and 18,600 cases of chronic pelvic pain were projected to occur. Assuming a 3% annual discount rate, we found the average per-person lifetime cost to be $2150. Average lifetime costs for women who developed major complications were $6350 for chronic pelvic pain, $6840 for ectopic pregnancy, and $1270 for infertility. The majority of costs (79%) were accrued within 5 years of upper genital tract infection. Results were most sensitive to assumptions about the timing of major complications and the discount rate.

CONCLUSION

The average per-person lifetime cost of PID ranges between $1060 and $3180. Future cost-effectiveness analyses of STD screening programs can include this range as a reasonable upper and lower bound. These findings suggest successful PID prevention efforts may avert substantial costs for care providers such as managed care organizations while providing well documented clinical benefits for women in the United States.

Funding in vitro fertilization treatment for persistent subfertility: the pain and the politics

OBJECTIVE

To consider the arguments for and against funding for in vitro fertilization (IVF) and to explore potential avenues for policy change.

DESIGN

Narrative literature review, policy analysis.

SETTING

University Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology.

PATIENT(S)

Sub-fertile women and men.

INTERVENTION(S)

Fertility treatments, in particular IVF.

RESULT(S)

The two main arguments used against funding for IVF are that [1] subfertility is a social, not a medical problem, and therefore its treatment is not medically indicated or necessary, and [2] the clinical effectiveness of IVF is unproven. These and other major arguments are critiqued.

CONCLUSION(S)

Dismissing IVF as medically unnecessary seems premature because medical necessity has not been operationally defined. Demonstrating IVF effectiveness through a randomized trial has not been done but is feasible: a multicenter trial is currently underway in Canada. Dealing with the concern that subfertility treatment challenges the role of women in society, as well as with questions of cost-effectiveness, are more difficult challenges that deserve further debate. The potential for unethical uses and broader social implications of IVF add to its dubious status and provide a convenient rationale for refusing to pay. However, none of these concerns is unique to IVF: many currently covered health services are susceptible to the same criticisms. For all services, judgments of eligibility for coverage should be consistent and transparent and should explicitly separate the issues of cost from other factors.

Cost effectiveness analysis of a population based screening programme for asymptomatic Chlamydia trachomatis infections in women by means of home obtained urine specimens

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the cost effectiveness of a systematic screening programme for asymptomatic Chlamydia trachomatis infections in a female inner city population. To determine the sensitivity of the cost effectiveness analysis to variation in the probability of developing sequelae.

METHODS

A decision tree was constructed to evaluate health effects of the programme, such as averted sequelae of chlamydial infection. Cost effectiveness from a societal perspective was estimated for screening by means of a ligase chain reaction on mailed, home obtained urine specimens, in a population with a C trachomatis test prevalence of 2.9%. An extensive sensitivity analysis was performed for the probability of sequelae, the percentage of preventable pelvic inflammatory disease (PID), and the discount rate.

RESULTS

The estimated net cost of curing one woman, aged 15-40 years, of a C trachomatis infection is US$1210. To prevent one major outcome (PID, tubal factor infertility, ectopic pregnancy, chronic pelvic pain, or neonatal pneumonia), 479 women would have to be screened. The net cost of preventing one major outcome is $15 800. Changing the probability of PID after chlamydial infection from 5% to 25% decreases the net cost per major outcome averted from $28 300 to $6380, a reduction of 78%. Results were less sensitive to variations in estimates for other sequelae. The breakeven prevalence of the programme ranges from 6.4% for the scenario with all probabilities for complications set at the maximum value to a prevalence of 100% for probabilities set at the minimum value.

CONCLUSIONS

Systematic screening of all women aged 15-40 years for asymptomatic C trachomatis infections is not cost effective. Although the results of the analyses are sensitive to variation in the assumptions, the costs exceed the benefits, even in the most optimistic scenario.

[Infertility treatment before assisted reproductive techniques]

The prevalence of infertility has increased in recent years, but the medical services to treat these problems are not available for most of the affected couples. The prognosis for fertility is important in order to determine the therapeutic capacity of each service, and to select the couples that could be treated at a primary level, or to send them to more advanced levels of reproductive technology. In practice, the infertility is treated in primary medical levels and the assisted reproductive technology is available only to a limited sector of the poblation. In general, the managed-care plans do not compensate directly for infertility treatments, but they are indirectly paying some therapeutic procedures for fertility.