Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Fertil Steril. 1999 Mar;71(3):468-75.

Prospective randomized trial comparing the outcome and cost of in vitro fertilization with that of a traditional treatment algorithm as first-line therapy for couples with infertility.

Author information

1
Center for Human Reproduction-Illinois, and Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Illinois at Chicago, 60610, USA. vkarande@aol.com

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

To determine whether IVF or a standard infertility treatment algorithm results in better outcome and/or lower cost when used as first-line therapy for couples with infertility.

DESIGN:

Prospective, randomized clinical study.

SETTING:

University-affiliated infertility clinic.

PATIENT(S):

Couples with newly diagnosed infertility and no prior treatment.

INTERVENTION(S):

Couples were randomized to undergo either IVF (group 1, n = 46) or a standard infertility treatment algorithm (group 2, n = 50) as initial therapy for infertility.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S):

Pregnancy rates and costs per couple, per month of treatment, and per pregnancy.

RESULT(S):

Pregnancy rates were higher in group 2 than in group 1. Costs per couple were not statistically different, although a trend toward higher costs was apparent in group 1, reflected by a higher median cost per clinical pregnancy established and a higher cost per month of treatment. Whereas cost differences between the groups diminished over time, pregnancy rates remained the same.

CONCLUSION(S):

In vitro fertilization currently does not represent an appropriate first-line treatment option for couples with infertility. The use of a standard infertility treatment algorithm results in a higher pregnancy rate and lower cost and therefore should be the preferred treatment approach.

Comment in

PMID:
10065784
DOI:
10.1016/s0015-0282(98)00490-7
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center