Time to Reconsider: Cost-Effectiveness in ART | ||||
| Journal of Reproductive Medicine and Embryology | ||||
| Article 5, Volume 1, Issue 3, September 2024, Page 176-181 PDF (231.36 K) | ||||
| Document Type: Narrative (literature review) | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/jrme.2024.324354.1024 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
Nehal Adel   1, 2; Mohamed Elmahdy 2, 3; Hassan Maghraby 2, 3
| ||||
| 1Madina ICSI Fertility Center, Madina women's hospital, Alexandria, Egypt. | ||||
| 2Egyptian Foundation of Reproductive Medicine and Embryology (EFRE), Egypt. | ||||
| 3Obstetrics and Gynecology Department, Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria University, Egypt. | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| The cost-benefit of any procedure is evaluated by comparing the monetary value of the benefits it provides with the costs incurred to achieve its goals. A positive cost-benefit occurs when the net monetary value of the benefits exceeds the costs. In the case of fertility treatments, such as ART, they should only be provided when the benefits (e.g., a live birth) outweigh the costs. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (2019) reports that infertility impacts one in eight couples globally. Key factors contributing to this include a growing trend toward delayed childbearing. Given the high costs and complexity of ART, there is an urgent need to implement simpler and more affordable diagnostic methods, mild ovarian stimulation, and streamlined culture procedures. At the same time, optimizing infertility care to improve its availability, affordability, safety, and effectiveness is crucial. In the current review, we will discuss the cost variations and effectiveness among different ART procedures. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Cost effectiveness; ART; ICSI; IVF; SCS | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 188 PDF Download: 103 |
||||
