European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology
Volume 138, Issue 1 , Pages 3-9 , May 2008

Coverage and current practice patterns regarding assisted reproduction techniques

  • José L. Navarro

      Affiliations

    • Subdirección Económica de Control de Gestión, Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, Spain
    • Departamento de Economía Internacional y de España, Universidad de Granada, Spain
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author at: Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, Avenida de las Fuerzas Armadas 2, 18014 Granada, Spain. Tel.: +34 958020095; fax: +34 958020102.
    • ,
  • José A. Castilla

      Affiliations

    • Unidad de Reproducción Humana, Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, Spain
    • ,
  • Luis Martínez

      Affiliations

    • Unidad de Reproducción Humana, Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, Spain
    • ,
  • Elisa Hernández

      Affiliations

    • Subdirección Económica de Control de Gestión, Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, Spain
    • Departamento de Economía Internacional y de España, Universidad de Granada, Spain
    • ,
  • Juan Fontes

      Affiliations

    • Unidad de Reproducción Humana, Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, Spain

Received 22 May 2007 ,Revised 20 January 2008 ,Accepted 19 February 2008.

References 

  1. Katz P, Nachtigall R, Showstack J. The economic impact of the assisted reproductive technologies. Nat Cell Biol. 2002;s29–s32[fertility supplement]
  2. Devlin N, Parkin D. Funding fertility: issues in the allocation and distribution of resources to assisted reproduction technologies. Hum Fertil. 2003;6:S2–S6
  3. World Health Organisation. Current Practices and Controversies in Assisted Reproduction. Report of a meeting on Medical, Ethical and Social Aspects of Assisted Reproduction held at WHO Headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland 17–21 September 2001. Geneva; 2002.
  4. Weisbrod BA. The health care quadrilemma: an essay on technological change, insurance, quality of care and cost containment. JEL. 1991;29:523–552
  5. OECD. Projecting OECD health and long-term care expenditures: What are the main drivers? Economics Department Working Papers. No. 477; 2006.
  6. Jones HW, Cohen J. IFFS Surveillance 04. Fertil Steril. 2004;81:S1–S54
  7. Jain T, Harlow BL, Hornstein MD. Insurance coverage and outcomes of in vitro fertilization. N Engl J Med. 2002;9:661–666
  8. Reynolds MA, Schieve LA, Jeng G, Peterson HB. Does insurance coverage decrease the risk for multiple births associated with assisted reproductive technology?. Fertil Steril. 2003;80:16–33
  9. Gleicher N, Weghofer A, Barad D. A formal comparison of the practice of assisted reproductive technologies between Europe and the USA. Hum Reprod. 2006;21:1945–1950
  10. Andersen AN, Goossens V, Gianaroli L, Felberbaum R, de Mouzon J, Nygren KG. Assisted reproductive technology in Europe, 2003. Results generated from European registers by ESHRE. Hum Reprod. 2007;22(6):1513–1525
  11. Wright V, Chang J, Jeng G, Macalauso M. Assisted reproductive technology surveillance—United States, 2003. MMWR. 2006;55:1–22
  12. Pouly JL, Larue L. Résultats de l’Assistance médicale à la procréation en France: sommoes-nous si mauvais?. Gynélogie Obstétrique Fertilité. 2007;35:30–37
  13. Templeton A, Morris J. Reducing the risk of multiple births by transfer of two embryos after in vitro fertilization. N Engl J Med. 1998;339:537–547
  14. Pandian Z, Templeton A, Serour G, Bhattacharya S. Number of embryos for transfer after IVF and ICSI: a Cochrane review. Hum Reprod. 2005;20:2681–2687
  15. Gerris JM. Single embryo transfer and IVF/ICSI outcome: a balanced appraisal. Hum Reprod Update. 2005;11:105–121
  16. Toner JP. Progress we can be proud of: US trends in assisted reproduction over the first 20 years. Fertil Steril. 2002;78:943–950
  17. Ombelet W, De Sutter P, Van der Elst J, Martens G. Multiple gestation and infertility treatment: registration, reflection and reaction-the Belgian project. Hum Reprod Update. 2005;11:3–14
  18. Gleicher N, Barad D. The relative myth of elective single embryo transfer. Hum Reprod. 2006;21:1337–1344
  19. Guzick DS. Should insurance coverage for in vitro fertilization be mandated?. N Engl J Med. 2002;347(1):686–688
  20. Garceau L, Henderson J, Davis LJ, et al. Economic implications of assisted reproductive techniques: a systematic review. Hum Reprod. 2002;17(2):3090–3109
  21. Directive 2004/23/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on setting standards of quality and safety for the donation, procurement, testing, processing, preservation, storage and distribution of human tissues and cells.
  22. Ragni G, Allegra A, Anserini P, et al. The 2004 Italian legislation regulating assisted reproductive technology: a multicenter survey on the results of IVF cycles. Hum Reprod. 2005;20:2224–2228

PII: S0301-2115(08)00060-2

doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2008.02.006

European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology
Volume 138, Issue 1 , Pages 3-9 , May 2008

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution