Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Observational Study
. 2020 Mar 16;10(3):e034566.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034566.

Observational retrospective study of UK national success, risks and costs for 319,105 IVF/ICSI and 30,669 IUI treatment cycles

Affiliations
Observational Study

Observational retrospective study of UK national success, risks and costs for 319,105 IVF/ICSI and 30,669 IUI treatment cycles

Gulam Bahadur et al. BMJ Open. .

Abstract

Objective: To compare success rates, associated risks and cost-effectiveness between intrauterine insemination (IUI) and in vitro fertilisation (IVF).

Design: Retrospective observational study.

Setting: The UK from 2012 to 2016.

Participants: Data from Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority's freedom of information request for 2012-2016 for IVF/ICSI (intracytoplasmic sperm injection)and IUI as practiced in 319 105 IVF/ICSI and 30 669 IUI cycles. Direct-cost calculations for maternal and neonatal expenditure per live birth (LB) was constructed using the cost of multiple birth model, with inflation-adjusted Bank of England index-linked data. A second direct-cost analysis evaluating the incremental cost-effective ratio (ICER) was modelled using the 2016 national mean (baseline) IVF and IUI success rates.

Outcome measures: LB, risks from IVF and IUI, and costs to gain 1 LB.

Results: This largest comprehensive analysis integrating success, risks and costs at a national level shows IUI is safer and more cost-effective than IVF treatment.IVF LB/cycle success was significantly better than IUI at 26.96% versus 11.49% (p<0.001) but the IUI success is much closer to IVF at 2.35:1, than previously considered. IVF remains a significant source of multiple gestation pregnancy (MGP) compared with IUI (RR (Relative Risk): 1.45 (1.31 to 1.60), p<0.001) as was the rate of twins (RR: 1.58, p<0.001).In 2016, IVF maternal and neonatal cost was £115 082 017 compared with £2 940 196 for IUI and this MGP-related perinatal cost is absorbed by the National Health Services. At baseline tariffs and success rates IUI was £42 558 cheaper than IVF to deliver 1LB with enhanced benefits with small improvements in IUI. Reliable levels of IVF-related MGP, OHSS (ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome), fetal reductions and terminations are revealed.

Conclusion: IUI success rates are much closer to IVF than previously reported, more cost-effective in delivering 1 LB, and associated with lower risk of complications for maternal and neonatal complications. It is prudent to offer IUI before IVF nationally.

Keywords: IUI; IVF; cost efficiency; risks; stakeholders; success.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Economic and financial analyses of IUI versus IVF- direct cost-effective analyses to deliver 1 LB based on actual success rates and tariffs for IUI and IVF. Cost analyses with varying IUI success against mean IVF success.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Economic and financial analyses of IUI versus IVF- direct cost-effective analyses to deliver 1 LB based on actual success rates and tariffs for IUI and IVF. Cost analyses with varying IVF success against mean IUI success.

References

    1. HFEA Jan What’s the difference between IVF and IUI? 2019. Available: https://www.hfea.gov.uk/treatments/explore-all-treatments/intrauterine-i...
    1. NICE National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Fertility problems: assessment and treatment. 2013. Clinical guideline [CG156] Published date: February 2013 Last updated: August 2016, 2013. Available: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg156
    1. Bahadur G, Woodward B, Homburg R, et al. . Pitfalls of NICE recommendations on fertility treatment. BMJ 2017;356:j751 10.1136/bmj.j751 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Cissen M, Bensdorp A, Cohlen BJ, et al. . Assisted reproductive technologies for male subfertility. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016;2:CD000360 10.1002/14651858.CD000360.pub5 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Farquhar CM, Liu E, Armstrong S, et al. . Intrauterine insemination with ovarian stimulation versus expectant management for unexplained infertility (TUI): a pragmatic, open-label, randomised, controlled, two-centre trial. Lancet 2018;391:441–50. 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)32406-6 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources