Abstract
Objective
To evaluate the cost ofin vitro fertilization by calculating the cost of a live birth using this technology and determine cost variation according to the clinical characteristics of a particular population.
Design
Retrospective review of infertile couples who presented for their first IVF cycle in 1993. A fraction of the total population was assigned to three groups A, B, and C with high, intermediate and low probability of pregnancy respectively and their reproductive performance was evaluated until September 1994 or a maximum of three IVF cycles have been completed.
Setting
Thein vitro fertilization program at the Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston.
Patients
182 couples who presented for their first IVF cycle in 1993.
Main Outcome Measure
The cost of a successful pregnancy using IVF in the three groups and in the general population was calculated by dividing the average cost of an IVF cycle by the fraction of the cycles resulting in a successful pregnancy.
Results
The cost of a successful pregnancy in group A, B and C ranged from $22,857 to $42,666 after 1 cycle and from $26,800 to $74,666 after 3 IVF cycles. The average cost for the 182 patients was $29,120 after 1 cycle and $31,590 after a maximum of 3 IVF cycles.
Conclusion
The cost of a successful pregnancy: (1) was comparable to other options available to an infertile couple such as adoption and tubal surgery, (2) was 50% to 70% cheaper in the group with a highest probability of pregnancy when compared to the group with the lowest probability of pregnancy, and (3) did not vary significantly after 1 or 3 IVF cycles in most groups.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Society of Reproductive Technology. The American Fertility Society: Assisted reproductive technology in the United States and Canada: 1991 results of the Society of Assisted Reproductive Technology generated from the American Fertility Society Registry. Fertil Steril 1994;62:1121–1128
Lancaster PAL. International comparisons of assisted reproduction. Assist Reprod Rev 1992;2:212–221
Health Security Act section by section analysis. Washington, DC: Executive Office of the President, 1993:21
World Health Organization: Laboratory Manual for the Examination of Human Semen and Sperm-Cervical Mucus Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992
Neumann PJ, Gharib SD, Weinstein MC: The cost of a successful delivery with in vitro fertilization. N Engl J Med 1994;331:239–243
Trad FS, Brumstead JR: Study of the cost effectiveness of in vitro fertilization and tubal reanastomosis in sterilization reversal. Presented at the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists District I Meeting, Montreal, Canada, 1994.
Winston RM, Margara RA: Microsurgical salpingostomy is not an obsolete procedure. Br J Obstet Gynecol 1991;98:637–642
Dubuisson JB, Bouquet de Joliniere J, Aubriot FX, Darai E, Foulot H, Mandelbrot L: Terminal tuboplasties by laparoscopy: 65 consecutive cases. Fertil Steril 1990;54:401
Zaharias GM, Honea KL, Houserman VL: A comparison of the cost effectiveness between laparoscopic salpingostomy versus in vitro fertilization in patients with distal tubal disease as a cause of infertility. Presented at the 50th American Fertility Society Meeting, San Antonio, Texas, 1994
Hann G, Van Steen R: Cost in relation to effects of in vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod 1992;7:982–986
Aranson D: Resolve Inc. Personal communication
Goldman J: Adoption resources, Boston. Personal communication
Filly RA, Callen PW, Goldstein RB: Alpha fetoprotein screening programs: what every obstetrics sonologist should know.In Ultrasonography in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 3rd ed, PW Callen (ed). Philadelphia, Saunders, 1994, pp 24–34
Neumann PJ, Johannesson M: Willingness to pay for in vitro fertilization: a pilot test using contingent valuation. Med Care 1994;32:686–699
Peterson CM, Hatasaka HH, Jones KP, Poulson AM, Carrell DT, Urry RL: Ovulation induction with gonadotropins and intrauterine insemination compared with in vitro fertilization and no therapy: a prospective, nonrandomized, cohort study and meta analysis. Fertil Steril 1994;62(3):535–544
Harrison RF, Kondaveeti U, Barry-Kinsella C, Gordon A, Drury L, Cottell E,et al: Should gonadotropin-releasing hormone down regulation therapy be routine in in vitro fertilization? Fertil Steril 1994;62(3):568–574
Frydman R, Forman R, Rainborn JD, Belaisch-Auard J, Hazout A, Testart J: A new approach to follicular stimulation for in vitro fertilization: programmed oocyte retrieval. Fertil Steril 1986;46:657–662
Wikland M, Borg J, Hamberger L, Svalander P: Simplification of IVF: minimal monitoring and the use of subcutaneous highly purified FSH administration for ovulation induction. Hum Reprod 1994;9:1430–1436
Dimitry ES, Bates SA, Oskarsson T, Margara R, Winston RM: Programming in vitro fertilization for a 3 or 5 day week. Fertil Steril 1991;55:934–938
Talbert LM, Hammond M, Bailey L, Wing R: A satellite system for assisted reproductive technologies: an evaluation. Fertil Steril 1991; 55(3):555–558
Verhoeff A, Roest J, Van Heudson M, Huisman GJ, Zeilmaker GH: Results of decentralized IVF treatment with transport and satellite locations. Presented at the 50th Meeting of the American Fertility Society, San Antonio, Texas, 1994
Congress of the United States. Office of Technology Assessment: Infertility: medical and social choices. OTA-BA-358, May 1988
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Trad, F.S., Hornstein, M.D. & Barbieri, R.L. In Vitro fertilization: A cost-effective alternative for infertile couples?. J Assist Reprod Genet 12, 418–421 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02211141
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02211141