The economic impact of assisted reproductive technology: a review of selected developed countries
- PMID: 19481642
- DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.04.029
The economic impact of assisted reproductive technology: a review of selected developed countries
Abstract
Objective: To compare regulatory and economic aspects of assisted reproductive technologies (ART) in developed countries.
Design: Comparative policy and economic analysis.
Patient(s): Couples undergoing ART treatment in the United States, Canada, United Kingdom, Scandinavia, Japan, and Australia.
Outcome measure(s): Description of regulatory and financing arrangements, cycle costs, cost-effectiveness ratios, total expenditure, utilization, and price elasticity.
Result(s): Regulation and financing of ART share few general characteristics in developed countries. The cost of treatment reflects the costliness of the underlying healthcare system rather than the regulatory or funding environment. The cost (in 2006 United States dollars) of a standard IVF cycle ranged from $12,513 in the United States to $3,956 in Japan. The cost per live birth was highest in the United States and United Kingdom ($41,132 and $40,364, respectively) and lowest in Scandinavia and Japan ($24,485 and $24,329, respectively). The cost of an IVF cycle after government subsidization ranged from 50% of annual disposable income in the United States to 6% in Australia. The cost of ART treatment did not exceed 0.25% of total healthcare expenditure in any country. Australia and Scandinavia were the only country/region to reach levels of utilization approximating demand, with North America meeting only 24% of estimated demand. Demand displayed variable price elasticity.
Conclusion(s): Assisted reproductive technology is expensive from a patient perspective but not from a societal perspective. Only countries with funding arrangements that minimize out-of-pocket expenses met expected demand. Funding mechanisms should maximize efficiency and equity of access while minimizing the potential harm from multiple births.
Similar articles
-
A cost-effectiveness comparison of embryo donation with oocyte donation.Fertil Steril. 2010 Feb;93(2):379-81. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.03.019. Epub 2009 May 5. Fertil Steril. 2010. PMID: 19406398
-
Socioeconomic disparities in access to ART treatment and the differential impact of a policy that increased consumer costs.Hum Reprod. 2013 Nov;28(11):3111-7. doi: 10.1093/humrep/det302. Epub 2013 Aug 1. Hum Reprod. 2013. PMID: 23906901
-
Assisted reproductive technology surveillance--United States, 2000.MMWR Surveill Summ. 2003 Aug 29;52(9):1-16. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2003. PMID: 14532867
-
Economic implications of insurance coverage for in vitro fertilization in the United States. A review.J Reprod Med. 2009 Nov-Dec;54(11-12):661-8. J Reprod Med. 2009. PMID: 20120898 Review.
-
Acceptable cost for the patient and society.Fertil Steril. 2013 Aug;100(2):319-27. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.06.017. Fertil Steril. 2013. PMID: 23905708 Review.
Cited by
-
Condition, disease, disability: how the label used to describe infertility may affect public support for fertility treatment coverage.J Assist Reprod Genet. 2021 Aug;38(8):2109-2119. doi: 10.1007/s10815-021-02231-z. Epub 2021 May 26. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2021. PMID: 34036457 Free PMC article.
-
Association Between MitoScore, BMI, and Body Fat Percentage as a Predictive Marker for the Outcome of In-Vitro Fertilization (IVF).Cureus. 2022 Jul 27;14(7):e27367. doi: 10.7759/cureus.27367. eCollection 2022 Jul. Cureus. 2022. PMID: 36046274 Free PMC article.
-
Residential proximity to a fertility clinic is independently associated with likelihood of women having ART and IUI treatment.Hum Reprod. 2022 Oct 31;37(11):2662-2671. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deac205. Hum Reprod. 2022. PMID: 36112009 Free PMC article.
-
US State-Level Infertility Insurance Mandates and Health Plan Expenditures on Infertility Treatments.Matern Child Health J. 2019 May;23(5):623-632. doi: 10.1007/s10995-018-2675-y. Matern Child Health J. 2019. PMID: 30600516 Free PMC article.
-
Exposure to Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals in Canada: Population-Based Estimates of Disease Burden and Economic Costs.Toxics. 2022 Mar 19;10(3):146. doi: 10.3390/toxics10030146. Toxics. 2022. PMID: 35324771 Free PMC article.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous