Economic evaluation of Medically Assisted Reproduction: an educational overview of methods and applications for healthcare professionals

Jeroen Luyten, Mark P. Connolly, Evelyn Verbeke, Klaus Buhler, Graham Scotland, Monica Lispi, Alberto Revelli, Isabelle Borget, Isabelle Cedrin-Durnerinm, Thomas M. D’hooghe* (Corresponding Author)

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Economic evaluations of the value-for-money of Medically Assisted Reproduction (MAR) interventions are increasingly important due to growing pressure on healthcare budgets. While such evaluations are commonplace in the published literature, the number/methodological complexity of different evaluations available, and the challenges specific to MAR interventions, can complicate the interpretation of such analyses for fertility treatments. This article aims to serve as an educational resource and provide context on the design/interpretation of economic analyses for MAR interventions. Several areas are relevant for first-line providers and decision makers: scope of analysis, comparator used, perspective/time horizon considered, outcomes used to measure success, and how results from cost-effectiveness studies can be summarized and used in clinical practice. We aim to help clinicians better understand the strengths/weaknesses of economic analyses, to enable the best use of the evidence in practice, so resources available for MAR interventions can provide maximum value to patients and society.
Original languageEnglish
JournalBest Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology
Early online date2 Feb 2022
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 2 Feb 2022

Keywords

  • Economic evaluation
  • assisted reproduction
  • Cost-effectiveness analysis
  • fertility treatment

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Economic evaluation of Medically Assisted Reproduction: an educational overview of methods and applications for healthcare professionals'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this