AVAILABILITY OF INFERTILITY TREATMENT WITH ART IN DIFFERENT SOCIO-ECONOMIC GROUPS. LITERATURE REVIEW

  • V. N. Lokshin International Clinical Center for Reproductology PERSONA
  • Sh. K. Karibaeva International Clinical Center for Reproductology PERSONA
  • M.D. Omar International Clinical Center for Reproductology PERSONA
Keywords: Infertility, ART, accessibility, socio-economic status of infertile couples

Abstract

This article assesses access to ART for infertility patients from different socio-economic groups according to the world literature. Content analysis was carried out on scientific articles corresponding to the chosen purpose on MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, PubMed and other sources of information. We sought to determine the availability of ART in the world, including the study of social and economic characteristics in need of infertility treatment. The search strategy combined the following search terms ‘accessibility’ ‘access, ‘affordability’, ‘sterility‘, ‘ART’, ‘seeking medical help’, ‘childlessness’. It was found that in many countries there is still inequality in the availability of infertility treatment with ART. In public health policy, in addition to improving access to health care, measures are needed to create equal opportunities for access to treatment in all social groups.

References

Lutz W, Skirbekk V. Policies Addressing the Tempo Effect in Low-Fertility Countries. Population and Development Review. 2005;31:699–720. doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2005.00094.x

Wolf DA, Lee RD, Miller T, Donehower G, Genest A. Fiscal externalities of becoming a parent. Popul Dev Rev. 2011;37(2):241–266. doi:10.1111/j.1728-4457.2011.00410.x

Bitler M, Schmidt L. Health disparities and infertility: impacts of state-level insurance mandates. Fertil Steril. 2006;85:858– 865. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.11.038

Lokshin V.N. Nauchnoe obosnovanie sovremennyih organizatsionnyih form uluchsheniya reproduktivnogo zdorovya zhenschin (na materiale RK). Dokt.disser. S-Pb. 2005. s.3-4.

Vayena.E. Rowe PJ, Griffin PD. Medical, ethical & social aspects of assisted reproduction Current practices & controversies in assisted reproduction: Report of a WHO meeting, 2001, Geneva, Switzerland

Gryshchenko Mykola & Lokshin Vyacheslav. ART in Europe, 2014: results generated from European registries by ESHRE: The European IVF-monitoring Consortium (EIM) for the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE). Human Reproduction. 2018. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dey242

Lokshin V. N., Ahmetova E. A. Vspomogatelnyie reproduktivnyie tehnologii v Respublike Kazahstan po dannyim registra 2011 g. Zh-l «Reproduktivnaya meditsina», Almatyi. -2013 -# 3-4 (16-17). S.5-10

European Society of Human Embryology and reproduction (ESHRE). Press Information. 2018 Feb 18.

Ferraretti, A.P., Goossens, V., Kupka, M., Bhattacharya, S., de Mouzon, J., Castilla, J.A., Erb, K., Korsak, V., Nyboe Andersen, A., and European IVF-Monitoring, Consortium for the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE). Assisted reproductive technology in Europe, 2009: results generated from European registers by ESHRE. Hum. Reprod. 2013; 28: 2318–2331. doi:10.1093/humrep/des023

NHMRC. National health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC). Ethical Guidelines in use of assisted reproductive technology in clinical practice and research 2007.

Smith, J.F., Eisenberg, M.L., Glidden, D., Millstein, S.G., Cedars, M., Walsh, T.J., Showstack, J., Pasch, L.A., Adler, N., and Katz, P.P. Socioeconomic disparities in the use and success of fertility treatments: analysis of data from a prospective cohort in the United States. Fertil. Steril. 2011; 96: 95–101 doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.06.043.

Hammoud, A.O., Gibson, M., Stanford, J., White, G., Carrell, D.T., and Peterson, M. In vitro fertilization availability and utilization in the United States: a study of demographic, social, and economic factors. Fertil. Steril. 2009; 91: 1630–1635 doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.10.038.

Räisänen, S., Randell, K., Nielsen, H.S., Gissler, M., Kramer, M.R., Klemetti, R., and Heinonen, S. Socioeconomic status affects the prevalence, but not the perinatal outcomes, of in vitro fertilization pregnancies. Hum. Reprod. 2013; 28: 3118– 3125 doi: 10.1093/humrep/det307.

Hilder, L., Zhichao, Z., Parker, M., Jahan, S., and Chambers, G.M. Australia’s mothers and babies 2012. (Perinatal Statistics Series no. 30. Cat. no. PER 69. Canberra: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare); 2014

Macaldowie, A., Lee, E., and Chambers, G.M. Assisted reproduction technology in Australia and New Zealand 2013. (Assisted reproduction technology series no. 18. The University of New South Wales. Sydney); 2015

Sari Räisänen, Kaisa Randell, Henriette Svarre Nielsen, Mika Gissler, Michael R. Kramer, Reija Klemetti, Seppo Heinonen, Socioeconomic status affects the prevalence, but not the perinatal outcomes, of in vitro fertilization pregnancies, Human Reproduction, Volume 28, Issue 11, November 2013, Pages 3118–3125, https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/det307

Chambers, G.M., Hoang, V.P., and Illingworth, P. Socioeconomic disparities in access in ART treatment and the differential impact of a policy that increased consumer costs. Hum. Reprod. 2013; 28: 3111–3117

Chambers, G.M., Hoang, V.P., Lee, E., Hansen, M., Bower, C., Sullivan, E.A., and Chapman, M.G. Hospital costs of multiple and singleton birth children during the first five years of life and the role of assisted reproductive technologies. (in press)JAMA Pediatr. 2014; 168: 1045–1053

Helmerhorst, F.M., Perquin, D.A.M., Donker, D., and Keirse, M.J.N.C. Perinatal outcome of singletons and twins after assisted conception: a systematic review of controlled studies. Br. Med. J. 2004; 328: 261

Bitler, M.P. and Schmidt, L. Utilization of infertility treatments: the effects of insurance mandates. Demography. 2012; 49: 125–149

Chambers, Georgina M. et al. The impact of consumer affordability on access to assisted reproductive technologies and embryo transfer practices: an international analysis Fertility and Sterility, Volume 101, Issue 1, 191 - 198.e4

Connolly, M.P., Postma, M.J., Crespi, S., Andersen, A.N., and Ziebe, S. The long-term fiscal impact of funding cuts to Danish public fertility clinics. Reprod Biomed Online. 2011; 23: 830–837

International Federation of Fertility Societies (IFFS) IFFS Surveillance 2010. Fertil Steril. 2011;95(2):491 doi: 10.1016/j. fertnstert.2010.08.011.

A.P. Ferraretti, K. Nygren, A. Nyboe Andersen, J. de Mouzon, M. Kupka, C. Calhaz-Jorge, C. Wyns, L. Gianaroli, V. Goossens, The European IVF-Monitoring Consortium (EIM), for the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE), Trends over 15 years in ART in Europe: an analysis of 6 million cycles, Human Reproduction Open, Volume 2017, Issue 2, 2017, hox012, https://doi.org/10.1093/hropen/hox012

Published
2019-09-20
How to Cite
Lokshin, V. N., Karibaeva, S. K., & Omar, M. (2019). AVAILABILITY OF INFERTILITY TREATMENT WITH ART IN DIFFERENT SOCIO-ECONOMIC GROUPS. LITERATURE REVIEW. Reproductive Medicine, (3(40), 8-12. Retrieved from https://repromed.org/index.php/journal/article/view/93