|
|
 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Background The use of in vitro fertilization has engendered considerable debate about who should have the procedure, whether health insurance should cover the cost, and if so, to what extent. We investigated the cost of a successful delivery with in vitro fertilization.
Methods We calculated the cost per successful delivery with in vitro fertilization (defined as at least one live birth) for a general population of couples undergoing in vitro fertilization and for two subgroups: couples with a diagnosis of tubal disease (who have a better chance of success), and couples in which the woman is over the age of 40 years and the man has a low sperm count (who have a lower chance of success). Information on charges per cycle of in vitro fertilization was obtained from six facilities across the country; delivery rates with this procedure were estimated from the literature.
Results On average, the cost incurred per successful delivery with in vitro fertilization increases from $66,667 for the first cycle of in vitro fertilization to $114,286 by the sixth cycle. The cost increases because with each cycle in which fertilization fails, the probability that a subsequent effort will be successful declines. Sensitivity analyses indicated that the cost per delivery ranges from $44,000 to $211,940. For couples with a better chance of successful in vitro fertilization (i.e., those with a diagnosis of tubal disease), it costs $50,000 per delivery for the first cycle and $72,727 for the sixth. For couples in which the woman is older and there is a diagnosis of male-factor infertility, the cost rises from $160,000 for the first cycle to $800,000 for the sixth.
Conclusions The debate about insurance coverage for in vitro fertilization must take into account ethical judgments and social values. But analyses of costs and cost effectiveness help elucidate the economic implications of using in vitro fertilization and thus inform the policy discussion.
Source Information
From the Project HOPE Center for Health Affairs, Bethesda, Md. (P.J.N.); the Division of General Medicine and Primary Care, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston (S.D.G.); and the Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston (M.C.W.).
Address reprint requests to Dr. Neumann at the Project HOPE Center for Health Affairs, Suite 600, 7500 Old Georgetown Rd., Bethesda, MD 20814.
Related Letters:
Economic Implications of Assisted Reproductive Technology
Visscher R. D., Damario M. A., Moomjy M., Rosenwaks Z., Seibel M. M., Kaufman J. L., Levy M. J., Neumann P. J., Gharib S. D., Weinstein M. C.
Extract |
Full Text
N Engl J Med 1994;
331:1588-1589, Dec 8, 1994.
Correspondence
This article has been cited by other articles:
HOME | SUBSCRIBE | SEARCH | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | COLLECTIONS | PRIVACY | HELP | beta.nejm.org Comments and questions? Please contact us. The New England Journal of Medicine is owned, published, and copyrighted © 2008 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved. |
Previous
