Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-669899f699-tzmfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-02T00:44:51.286Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 9 - The Economics of IVF: Evaluating the Necessity and Value of Public Funding

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 March 2020

By
Evelyn Verbeke ,
Jeroen Luyten  and
Thomas D’Hooghe
Edited by
Alice D. Domar ,
Denny Sakkas  and
Thomas L. Toth
Alice D. Domar
Affiliation:
Boston IVF, Waltham, MA
Denny Sakkas
Affiliation:
Boston IVF, Waltham, MA
Thomas L. Toth
Affiliation:
Boston IVF, Waltham, MA
Get access

Summary

Infertility is recognized by the WHO as a condition leading to disability, and it is widely acknowledged that patients have a right to treatment. One of the treatment options is ART. The International Glossary on Infertility and Fertility care defines procedures of ART as “all interventions that include the in vitro handling of both human oocytes and sperm or of embryos for the purpose of reproduction. This includes, but is not limited to, IVF and ET, ICSI, embryo biopsy, PGT, assisted hatching, gamete intrafallopian transfer, zygote intrafallopian transfer, gamete and embryo cryopreservation, semen, oocyte and embryo donation, and gestational carrier cycles.

Type
Chapter
Information
Patient-Centered Assisted Reproduction
How to Integrate Exceptional Care with Cutting-Edge Technology
 , pp. 106 - 134
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

WHO. Infertility Definitions and Terminology. Online article. http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/topics/infertility/definitions/en/Google Scholar
Zegers-Hochschild, F et al. The International Glossary on Infertility and Fertility Care, 2017. Hum Reprod. 2017; 32(9): 1786–801.Google Scholar
De Geyter, C et al. ART in Europe, 2014: Results Generated from European Registries by ESHRE. The European IVF-monitoring Consortium (EIM) for the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE). Hum Reprod. 2018; 33(9): 1586–601.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Centrum voor Reproductieve Geneeskunde. Information About the Cost of an Assisted Reproductive Treatment for Belgian Patients. Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel. 2016.Google Scholar
Martins, WP, Niederberger, C, Nastri, CO, Racowsky, C. Making Evidence-Based Decisions in Reproductive Medicine. Fertil Steril. 2018; 110(7): 1227–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Drummond, MF, Sculpher, MJ, Torrance, GW, O’Brien, BJ, Stoddart, GL. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes (3rd Edition). Great Britain: Oxford University Press; 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hernandez Torres, E et al. Economic Evaluation of Elective Single-Embryo Transfer with Subsequent Single Frozen Embryo Transfer in an in Vitro Fertilization/Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection Program. Fertil Steril. 2015; 103(3): 699–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiddelers, AAA et al. Cost-Effectiveness of Seven IVF Strategies: Results of a Markov Decision-Analytic Model. Hum Reprod. 2009; 24(7): 1648–55.Google Scholar
Veleva, Z, Karinen, P, Tomas, C, Tapanainen, JS, Martikainen, H. Elective Single Embryo Transfer with Cryopreservation Improves the Outcome and Diminishes the Costs of IVF/ICSI. Hum Reprod. 2009; 24(7): 1632–9.Google Scholar
Papaleo, E et al. A Direct Healthcare Cost Analysis of the Cryopreserved Versus Fresh Transfer Policy at the Blastocyst Stage. Reprod Biomed Online. 2017; 34(1): 19–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roque, M, Valle, M, Guimarães, F, Sampaio, M, Geber, S. Cost-Effectiveness of the Freeze-All Policy. JBRA Assist Reprod. 2015; 19(3): 125–30.Google Scholar
Le, KD et al. A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Freeze-Only or Fresh Embryo Transfer in IVF of Non-PCOS Women. Hum Reprod. 2018; 33(10): 1907–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pham, CT, Karnon, JD, Norman, RJ, Mol, BW. Cost-Effectiveness Modelling of IVF in Couples with Unexplained Infertility. Reprod Biomed Online. 2018; 37(5): 555–63.Google Scholar
Eijkemans, MJC et al. Cost-Effectiveness of “Immediate IVF” Versus “Delayed IVF”: A Prospective Study. Hum Reprod. 2017; 32(5): 999–1008.Google Scholar
van Loendersloot, LL et al. Cost-Effectiveness of Single Versus Double Embryo Transfer in IVF in Relation to Female Age. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2017; 214: 25–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tjon-Kon-Fat, RI et al. Is IVF – Served Two Different Ways – More Cost-Effective Than IUI with Controlled Ovarian Hyperstimulation? Hum Reprod. 2015; 30(10): 2331–9.Google Scholar
Scotland, GS et al. Minimising Twins in In Vitro Fertilisation: A Modelling Study Assessing the Costs, Consequences and Cost-Utility of Elective Single Versus Double Embryo Transfer over a 20-Year Time Horizon. BJOG. 2011; 118(9): 1073–83.Google Scholar
Messinger, LB et al. Cost and Efficacy Comparison of in Vitro Fertilization and Tubal Anastomosis for Women After Tubal Ligation. Fertil Steril. 2015; 104(1): 32–8.e4.Google Scholar
Yilmaz, N et al. Perinatal Outcomes and Cost-Effectivity of the Assisted Reproduction Pregnancies with Advanced Age: A Retrospective Analysis. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2017; 37(4): 450–3.Google Scholar
Chambers, GM, Sullivan, EA, Ishihara, O, Chapman, MG, Adamson, GD. The Economic Impact of Assisted Reproductive Technology: A Review of Selected Developed Countries. Fertil Steril. 2009; 91(6): 2281–94.Google Scholar
Williams, CB, Mackenzie, KC, Gahagan, S The Effect of Maternal Obesity on the Offspring. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2014; 57(3): 508–15.Google Scholar
Connolly, M, Gallo, F, Hoorens, S, Ledger, W. Assessing Long-Run Economic Benefits Attributed to an IVF-Conceived Singleton Based on Projected Lifetime Net Tax Contributions in the UK. Hum Reprod. 2008; 24(3): 626–32.Google Scholar
Settumba, SN, Shanahan, M, Botha, W, Ramli, MZ, Chambers, GM. Reliability and Validity of the Contingent Valuation Method for Estimating Willingness to Pay: A Case of In Vitro Fertilisation. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spiegel, U, Gonen, LD, Templeman, J. Economic Implications of in Vitro Fertilization Using Willingness to Pay. J Public Health. 2013; 21(6): 535–57.Google Scholar
Devlin, N, Parkin, D. Funding Fertility: Issues in the Allocation and Distribution of Resources to Assisted Reproduction Technologies. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2003; 6(1): S2–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Collins, JA. An International Survey of the Health Economics of IVF and ICSI. Hum Reprod Update. 2002; 8(3): 265–77.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McTernan, E. Should Fertility Treatment be State Funded? J Appl Philos. 2015; 32(3): 227–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hubens, K, Arons, AMM, Krol, M. Measurement and Evaluation of Quality of Life and Well-Being in Individuals Having or Having Had Fertility Problems: A Systematic Review. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2018; 1–10.Google Scholar
McMillan, J. Allocating Fertility Services by Medical Need. Hum Fertil. 2001; 4(1): 11–13.Google Scholar
Connolly, MP, Griesinger, G, Ledger, W, Postma, MJ. The Impact of Introducing Patient Co-Payments in Germany on the Use of IVF and ICSI: A Price-Elasticity of Demand Assessment. Hum Reprod. 2009; 24(11): 2796–800.Google Scholar
Dolan, P, Rudisill, C. Babies in Waiting: Why Increasing the IVF Age Cut-off Might Lead to Fewer Wanted Pregnancies in the Presence of Procrastination. Health Policy. 2015; 119(2): 174–9.Google Scholar
IFFS Surveillance 2016. Global Reproductive Health. Online article. https://journals.lww.com/grh/Fulltext/2016/09000/IFFS_Surveillance_2016.1.aspxGoogle Scholar
Salama, M. Cross Border Reproductive Care (CBRC): A Growing Global Phenomenon with Multidimensional Implications (a Systematic and Critical Review). J Assist Reprod Genet. 2018; 35(7): 1277–88.Google Scholar
Präg, P, Mills, MC Assisted Reproductive Technology in Europe: Usage and Regulation in the Context of Cross-Border Reproductive Care. In: Kreyenfeld, M, Konietzka, D (eds.) Childlessness in Europe: Contexts, Causes, and Consequences. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2017: 289–309.Google Scholar
Crawford, S et al. Costs of Achieving Live Birth from Assisted Reproductive Technology: A Comparison of Sequential Single and Double Embryo Transfer Approaches. Fertil Steril. 2016; 105(2): 444–50.Google Scholar
Højgaard, A, Ottosen, LDM, Kesmodel, U, Ingerslev, HJ. Patient Attitudes Towards Twin Pregnancies and Single Embryo Transfer – a Questionnaire Study. Hum Reprod. 2007; 22(10): 2673–8.Google Scholar
Libby, V, Thakore, S, Weinerman, R, Goldfarb, J. Change in Patient Attitude Towards Multiple Gestation Pregnancies and Selective Fetal Reduction over 20 Years. Fertil Steril. 2018; 109(3): e36.Google Scholar
Multiple Pregnancies Following Assisted Conception. BJOG. 2018; 125(5): e12–18.Google Scholar
Maheshwari, A, Griffiths, S, Bhattacharya, S. Global Variations in the Uptake of Single Embryo Transfer. Hum Reprod Update. 2011; 17(1): 107–20.Google Scholar
Peeraer, K et al. The Impact of Legally Restricted Embryo Transfer and Reimbursement Policy on Cumulative Delivery Rate After Treatment with Assisted Reproduction Technology. Hum Reprod. 2014; 29(2): 267–75.Google Scholar
Ombelet, W. Is Global Access to Infertility Care Realistic? The Walking Egg Project. Reprod Biomed Online. 2014; 28(3): 267–72.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×