4.7 Article

Costs of infertility treatment: results from an 18-month prospective cohort study

Journal

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
Volume 95, Issue 3, Pages 915-921

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.11.026

Keywords

Infertility; cost; resource use; prospective study

Funding

  1. National Institute for Child Health and Human Development [HD37074]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To examine resource use (costs) by women presenting for infertility evaluation and treatment over 18 months, regardless of treatment pursued. Design: Prospective cohort study in which women were followed for 18 months. Setting: Eight infertility practices. Patient(s): Three hundred ninety-eight women recruited from infertility practices. Intervention(s): Women completed interviews and questionnaires at baseline and after 4, 10, and 18 months of follow-up. Medical records were abstracted after 18 months to obtain details of services used. Main Outcome Measure(s): Per-person and per-successful-outcome costs. Result(s): Treatment groups were defined as highest intensity treatment use. Twenty percent of women did not pursue cycle-based treatment; approximately half pursued IVF. Median per-person costs ranged from $1,182 for medications only to $24,373 and $38,015 for IVF and IVF-donor egg groups, respectively. Estimates of costs of successful outcomes (delivery or ongoing pregnancy by 18 months) were higher-$61,377 for IVF, for example-reflecting treatment success rates. Within the time frame of the study, costs were not significantly different for women whose outcomes were successful and women whose outcomes were not. Conclusion(s): Although individual patient costs vary, these cost estimates developed from actual patient treatment experiences may provide patients with realistic estimates to consider when initiating infertility treatment. (Fertil Steril (R) 2011; 95: 915-21. (C) 2011 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available