Accelerated fertility treatment leads to shortened time to pregnancy and cost savings

June 30, 2009

A major new trial recently published in the journal Fertility and Sterility shows that for couples beginning infertility treatments, an accelerated path to in-vitro fertilization (IVF) can offer a shorter time to pregnancy, cost savings of nearly $10,000, and a lowered risk of multiple births.

For the first time, these results demonstrate that the long held treatment combining fertility injections with insemination (IUI) does not have a place in infertility treatments today. This study also demonstrates that today's infertility treatments are very successful. When fertility care is covered by insurance (or alternatively when couples can afford all needed treatment), the vast majority will have a baby, and the quickest way to get pregnant is to follow this new shortened protocol.

Elizabeth Ginsburg, President of the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology, commented, "This is a very important study that will likely influence physicians to reduce the number of stimulated inseminations for patients with unexplained infertility. Adoption of such an accelerated course of treatment could result in many patients conceiving in less time with less expense."

Known as the FASTT (fast-track and standard treatment) Trial, this study is the largest of its kind to date to measure the effectiveness of contemporary infertility treatments. Led by Richard Reindollar, M.D., Chair of the Department of and at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center and Dartmouth Medical School, the study omitted the gonadotropin-stimulated cycle that usually precedes assisted reproductive technology, for approximately one-half of the 503 participating couples.

"One key strength of the trial was the Massachusetts Infertility Mandate, which requires insurers to cover the cost of fertility treatments," said Dr. Reindollar. "Such a large trial would not have been possible in a self-pay or partial coverage environment in which the cost of care is a much larger factor in the couple's choice of therapy."

Reindollar says another strength of the study in relation to previous efforts on the subject was a large volume of patients available at a single IVF center which allowed for standardized protocols and procedures. In addition, since the study was done in cooperation with insurance companies, there was access to detailed charge data for the patients.

Couples with unexplained infertility seeking treatment at Boston IVF or Harvard Vanguard Medical Associates were screened for eligibility to participate in the randomized, controlled trial. Eligibility criteria included: trying to conceive for 12 months without prior fertility treatment (excepting up to three cycles of clomiphene without intrauterine insemination (IUI)); a female partner 21 to 39 years old with sufficient ovarian reserve and without pelvic pathology; and adequate sperm concentration in the male partner.

Couples enrolled in the study followed either a conventional course of treatment or an accelerated course until they achieved pregnancy or elected to stop treatment. The conventional treatment included three cycles of the fertility pills with inseminations (IUI), followed by three cycles of the fertility injections with inseminations, then up to six cycles of IVF. The accelerated treatment plan omitted the cycles with fertility injections and IUI and went to IVF after three cycles of the fertility pill combined with IUI. The couples were followed from the date of their enrollment until the closing date of the study. Charge data obtained from insurers included all health care items and services for women during the trial.

Of 503 couples enrolled, 64% delivered at least one baby by the end of the study and an additional 10% had an ongoing pregnancy beyond 5 months. Babies were born to 150/247 couples in the conventional treatment group and to 171/256 couples in accelerated treatment. The time to pregnancy was significantly shortened for the couples in the accelerated arm of the study. Those couples achieved pregnancy in an average of eight months compared with an average time to pregnancy of 11 months for couples in the conventional arm.

Insurance charge data were collected for 448 participating couples. Average charges per delivery were $9,800 lower in the accelerated arm than for conventional treatment. Savings of $2,624 per couple were observed in the accelerated treatment arm.

Source: Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical School

Related Stories

Recommended for you

Best of Last Year—The top Medical Xpress articles of 2017

December 20, 2017
It was a good year for medical research as a team at the German center for Neurodegenerative Diseases, Magdeburg, found that dancing can reverse the signs of aging in the brain. Any exercise helps, the team found, but dancing ...

Pickled in 'cognac', Chopin's heart gives up its secrets

November 26, 2017
The heart of Frederic Chopin, among the world's most cherished musical virtuosos, may finally have given up the cause of his untimely death.

Sugar industry withheld evidence of sucrose's health effects nearly 50 years ago

November 21, 2017
A U.S. sugar industry trade group appears to have pulled the plug on a study that was producing animal evidence linking sucrose to disease nearly 50 years ago, researchers argue in a paper publishing on November 21 in the ...

Female researchers pay more attention to sex and gender in medicine

November 7, 2017
When women participate in a medical research paper, that research is more likely to take into account the differences between the way men and women react to diseases and treatments, according to a new study by Stanford researchers.

Drug therapy from lethal bacteria could reduce kidney transplant rejection

August 3, 2017
An experimental treatment derived from a potentially deadly microorganism may provide lifesaving help for kidney transplant patients, according to an international study led by investigators at Cedars-Sinai.

Exploring the potential of human echolocation

June 25, 2017
People who are visually impaired will often use a cane to feel out their surroundings. With training and practice, people can learn to use the pitch, loudness and timbre of echoes from the cane or other sounds to navigate ...

0 comments

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.