Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://hdl.handle.net/2440/85457
Citations | ||
Scopus | Web of Science® | Altmetric |
---|---|---|
?
|
?
|
Type: | Journal article |
Title: | Cost-effectiveness of hysteroscopy screening for infertile women |
Author: | Kasius, J. Eijkemans, R. Mol, B. Fauser, B. Fatemi, H. Broekmans, F. |
Citation: | Reproductive Biomedicine Online, 2013; 26(6):619-626 |
Publisher: | Elsevier |
Issue Date: | 2013 |
ISSN: | 1472-6483 1472-6491 |
Statement of Responsibility: | Jenneke C. Kasius, René J.C. Eijkemans, Ben W.J. Mol, Bart C.J.M. Fauser, Human M. Fatemi, Frank J.M. Broekmans |
Abstract: | This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of office hysteroscopy screening prior to IVF. Therefore, the cost-effectiveness of two distinct strategies - hysteroscopy after two failed IVF cycles (Failedhyst) and routine hysteroscopy prior to IVF (Routinehyst) - was compared with the reference strategy of no hysteroscopy (Nohyst). When present, intrauterine pathology was treated during hysteroscopy. Two models were constructed and evaluated in a decision analysis. In model I, all patients had an increase in pregnancy rate after screening hysteroscopy prior to IVF; in model II, only patients with intrauterine pathology would benefit. For each strategy, the total costs and live birth rates after a total of three IVF cycles were assessed. For model I (all patients benefit from hysteroscopy), Routinehyst was always cost-effective compared with Nohyst or Failedhyst. For the Routinehyst strategy, a monetary profit would be obtained in the case where hysteroscopy would increase the live birth rate after IVF by ≥ 2.8%. In model II (only patients with pathology benefit from hysteroscopy), Routinehyst also dominated Failedhyst. However, hysteroscopy performance resulted in considerable costs. In conclusion, the application of a routine hysteroscopy prior to IVF could be cost-effective. However, randomized trials confirming the effectiveness of hysteroscopy are needed. |
Keywords: | Assisted reproduction; cost-effectiveness; hysteroscopy; infertility; IVF |
Rights: | © 2013 Reproductive Healthcare Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.rbmo.2013.02.015 |
Published version: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2013.02.015 |
Appears in Collections: | Aurora harvest 7 Obstetrics and Gynaecology publications |
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.