Economic evaluations of single- versus double-embryo transfer in IVF

被引:47
作者
Fiddelers, A. A. A.
Severens, J. L.
Dirksen, C. D.
Dumoulin, J. C. M.
Land, J. A.
Evers, J. L. H.
机构
[1] Univ Limburg, Acad Hosp Maastricht, Res Inst Grow & Dev, GROW,Det Clin Epidemiol & Med Technol Assessment, NL-6202 AZ Maastricht, Netherlands
[2] Maastricht Univ, Dept Hlth Org Policy & Econ, Maastricht, Netherlands
[3] Univ Limburg, Acad Hosp Maastricht, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol, Maastricht, Netherlands
[4] Univ Groningen, Med Ctr, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol, Groningen, Netherlands
关键词
systematic review; cost-effectiveness; single embryo transfer;
D O I
10.1093/humupd/dml053
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
Multiple pregnancies lead to complications and induce high costs. The most successful way to decrease multiple pregnancies in IVF is to transfer only one embryo, which might reduce the efficacy of treatment. The objective of this review is to determine which embryo-transfer policy is most cost-effective: elective single-embryo transfer (eSET) or double-embryo transfer (DET). Several databases were searched for (cost* or econ*) and (single embryo* or double embryo* or one embryo* or two embryo* or elect* embryo or multip* embryo*). On the basis of five exclusion criteria, titles and abstracts were screened by two individual reviewers. The remaining papers were read for further selection, and data were extracted from the selected studies. A total of 496 titles were identified through the searches and resulted in the selection of one observational study and three randomized studies. Study characteristics, total costs and probability of live births were extracted. Besides this, cost-effectiveness and incremental cost-effectiveness were derived. It can be concluded that DET is the most expensive strategy. DET is also most effective if performed in one fresh cycle. eSET is only preferred from a cost-effectiveness point of view when performed in good prognosis patients and when frozen/thawed cycles are included. If frozen/thawed cycles are excluded, the choice between eSET and DET depends on how much society is willing to pay for one extra successful pregnancy.
引用
收藏
页码:5 / 13
页数:9
相关论文
共 55 条
[1]   Assisted reproductive technology in Europe, 2001. Results generated from European registers by ESHRE [J].
Andersen, AN ;
Gianaroli, L ;
Felberbaum, R ;
de Mouzon, J ;
Nygren, KG .
HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 2005, 20 (05) :1158-1176
[2]   Health outcome measures used in cost-effectiveness studies: a review of original articles published between 1986 and 1996 [J].
Anell, A ;
Norinder, A .
HEALTH POLICY, 2000, 51 (02) :87-99
[3]   Single embryo transfer: a mini-review [J].
Bergh, C .
HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 2005, 20 (02) :323-327
[4]   Modelling in health economic evaluation - What is its place? What is its value? [J].
Brennan, A ;
Akehurst, R .
PHARMACOECONOMICS, 2000, 17 (05) :445-459
[5]  
Briggs AH, 1997, HEALTH ECON, V6, P327, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1050(199707)6:4<327::AID-HEC282>3.0.CO
[6]  
2-W
[7]   The death of cost-minimization analysis? [J].
Briggs, AH ;
O'Brien, BJ .
HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2001, 10 (02) :179-184
[8]  
Brouwer WBF, 1997, HEALTH ECON, V6, P253, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1050(199705)6:3<253::AID-HEC266>3.3.CO
[9]  
2-Y
[10]  
Buxton MJ, 1997, HEALTH ECON, V6, P217, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1050(199705)6:3<217::AID-HEC267>3.3.CO