2008
DOI: 10.1007/s10815-008-9239-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Affordable ART for developing countries: a cost benefit comparison of low dose stimulation versus high dose GnRH antagonist protocol

Abstract: Objective Low dose stimulation (LS) is emerging as an alternative regime in assisted reproductive technology (ART). This study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of LS to the high dose GnRH antagonist (Atg) regime. Methods An observational prospective study conducted at an academic infertility unit from January to June 2007. Outcome measures included the numbers of follicles, oocytes and embryos, morphological quality of oocytes and embryos, clinical pregnancy (PR) and complication rate. Result Ninety fiv… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In a comparative study of 54 low-cost and 41 conventional ART cycles from the Netherlands, mild stimulation protocol using clomiphene and lowdose gonadotropins resulted in reduced cost by almost 47%. In this study, the costing was based on hospital charges and dose of gonadotropins (Noorashikin et al, 2008). Corroborating this data, herein in a limited numbers of patients, we have shown that the cost per cycle is almost 50% lower with low-cost ART as compared to conventional ART cycles.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 64%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In a comparative study of 54 low-cost and 41 conventional ART cycles from the Netherlands, mild stimulation protocol using clomiphene and lowdose gonadotropins resulted in reduced cost by almost 47%. In this study, the costing was based on hospital charges and dose of gonadotropins (Noorashikin et al, 2008). Corroborating this data, herein in a limited numbers of patients, we have shown that the cost per cycle is almost 50% lower with low-cost ART as compared to conventional ART cycles.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 64%
“…The strength of current study lies in it being a comprehensive resource-based costing analysis with direct observation of the resources consumed during ART treatment. Earlier studies have done retrospective cost analysis from medical and financial records of the hospital while the current study was prospective (Bouwmans et al, 2008;Noorashikin et al, 2008;Tjon-Kon-Fat et al, 2015). Generally, the financial departments of hospitals are not tailored to register resource use at the level of patient groups, which limited application of a uniform methodology for calculating costs.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This, however, is seen less in the antagonist and minimal stimulation cycle. 11 Most of our patients were managed as an outpatient.…”
Section: Imjm Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%