Universal coverage of IVF pays off
- PMID: 24706002
- DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deu067
Universal coverage of IVF pays off
Abstract
Study question: What was the clinical and economic impact of universal coverage of IVF in Quebec, Canada, during the first calendar year of implementation of the public IVF programme?
Summary answer: Universal coverage of IVF increased access to IVF treatment, decreased the multiple pregnancy rate and decreased the cost per live birth, despite increased costs per cycle.
What is known already: Public funding of IVF assures equality of access to IVF and decreases multiple pregnancies resulting from this treatment. Public IVF programmes usually mandate a predominant SET policy, the most effective approach for reducing the incidence of multiple pregnancies.
Study design, size, duration: This prospective comparative cohort study involved 7364 IVF cycles performed in Quebec during 2009 and 2011 and included an economic analysis.
Participants/materials, setting, methods: IVF cycles performed in the five centres offering IVF treatment in Quebec during 2009, before implementation of the public IVF programme, were compared with cycles performed at the same centres during 2011, the first full calendar year following implementation of the programme. Data were obtained from the Canadian Assisted Reproductive Technologies Register (CARTR). Comparisons were made between the two periods in terms of utilization, pregnancy rates, multiple pregnancy rates and costs.
Main results and the role of chance: The number of IVF cycles performed in Quebec increased by 192% after the new policy was implemented. Elective single-embryo transfer was performed in 1.6% of the cycles during Period I (2009), and increased to 31.6% during Period II (2011) (P < 0.001). Although the clinical pregnancy rate per embryo transfer was lower in 2011 than in 2009 (24.9 versus 39.9%, P < 0.001), the multiple pregnancy rate was greatly reduced (6.4 versus 29.4%, P < 0.001). The public IVF programme increased government costs per IVF treatment cycle from CAD$3730 to CAD$4759. Despite increased costs per cycle, the efficiency defined by the cost per live birth, which factored in downstream health costs up to 1 year post delivery, decreased from CAD$49 517 to CAD$43 362 per baby conceived by either fresh and frozen cycles.
Limitations, reasons for caution: The costs described in the economic model are likely an underestimate as they do not factor in many of the long-term costs that can occur after 1 year of age. The information collected in the Canadian ART register precludes the calculation of cumulative pregnancy rates.
Wider implications of the findings: Our study confirms that the implementation of a public IVF programme favouring eSET not only sharply decreases the incidence of multiple pregnancy, but also reduces the cost per live birth.
Study funding/competing interest(s): M.P.V. holds a fellowship award from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR). The economic analysis performed by M.P.C. was supported by an unrestricted grant from Ferring Pharmaceutical.
Keywords: cost per pregnancy; economics; in vitro fertilization; multiple pregnancy; single-embryo transfer.
Similar articles
-
Modified natural cycle versus controlled ovarian hyperstimulation IVF: a cost-effectiveness evaluation of three simulated treatment scenarios.Hum Reprod. 2013 Dec;28(12):3236-46. doi: 10.1093/humrep/det386. Epub 2013 Oct 27. Hum Reprod. 2013. PMID: 24166594
-
Is IVF-served two different ways-more cost-effective than IUI with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation?Hum Reprod. 2015 Oct;30(10):2331-9. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dev193. Epub 2015 Aug 12. Hum Reprod. 2015. PMID: 26269539 Clinical Trial.
-
Reduction of multiple pregnancies in the advanced maternal age population after implementation of an elective single embryo transfer policy coupled with enhanced embryo selection: pre- and post-intervention study.Hum Reprod. 2015 Sep;30(9):2097-106. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dev159. Epub 2015 Jul 5. Hum Reprod. 2015. PMID: 26150408 Free PMC article.
-
Economic evaluations of single- versus double-embryo transfer in IVF.Hum Reprod Update. 2007 Jan-Feb;13(1):5-13. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dml053. Epub 2006 Nov 10. Hum Reprod Update. 2007. PMID: 17099208 Review.
-
Elective Single Embryo Transfer: an update to UK Best Practice Guidelines.Hum Fertil (Camb). 2015 Sep;18(3):165-83. doi: 10.3109/14647273.2015.1083144. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2015. PMID: 26391438 Review.
Cited by
-
Infertility and Risk of Autism Spectrum Disorder in Children.JAMA Netw Open. 2023 Nov 1;6(11):e2343954. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.43954. JAMA Netw Open. 2023. PMID: 37983032 Free PMC article.
-
Promoting the use of elective single embryo transfer in clinical practice.Fertil Res Pract. 2016 Aug 15;2:1. doi: 10.1186/s40738-016-0024-7. eCollection 2016. Fertil Res Pract. 2016. PMID: 28620526 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Declining global fertility rates and the implications for family planning and family building: an IFFS consensus document based on a narrative review of the literature.Hum Reprod Update. 2024 Mar 1;30(2):153-173. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmad028. Hum Reprod Update. 2024. PMID: 38197291 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Public health implications of a North American publicly funded in vitro fertilization program; lessons to learn.J Assist Reprod Genet. 2015 Sep;32(9):1385-93. doi: 10.1007/s10815-015-0530-2. Epub 2015 Jul 14. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2015. PMID: 26169074 Free PMC article.
-
Impact of government health coverage for ART: The results of a 5-year experience in Quebec.Reprod Biomed Soc Online. 2019 Mar 16;8:32-37. doi: 10.1016/j.rbms.2019.01.002. eCollection 2019 Jun. Reprod Biomed Soc Online. 2019. PMID: 31016250 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Research Materials
Miscellaneous