Literature DB >> 29580644

Intracytoplasmic sperm injection use in states with and without insurance coverage mandates for infertility treatment, United States, 2000-2015.

Ada C Dieke1, Akanksha Mehta2, Dmitry M Kissin3, Ajay K Nangia4, Lee Warner3, Sheree L Boulet3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare indications and trends in intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) use for in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles among residents of states with and without insurance mandates for IVF coverage.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of the National Assisted Reproductive Technology Surveillance System from 2011 to 2015 for the main outcome and from 2000 to 2015 for trends.
SETTING: IVF cycles performed in U.S. fertility clinics. PATIENT(S): Fresh IVF cycles. INTERVENTION(S): Residency in a state with an insurance mandate for IVF (n = 8 states) versus no mandate (n = 43 states, including DC). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): ICSI use by insurance coverage mandate status stratified by male-factor infertility diagnosis. RESULT(S): During 2000-2015, there were 1,356,377 fresh IVF cycles, of which 25.8% (n = 350,344) were performed for residents of states with an insurance coverage mandate for IVF. ICSI use increased significantly during 2000-2015 in states both with and without a mandate; however, for non-male-factor infertility cycles, the percentage increase in ICSI use was greater among nonmandate states (34.6% in 2000 to 73.9% in 2015) versus mandate states (39.5% in 2000 to 63.5% in 2015). For male-factor infertility cycles, this percentage increase was ∼7.3% regardless of residency in a state with an insurance mandate for IVF. From 2011 to 2015, ICSI use was lower in mandate versus nonmandate states, both for cycles with (91.5% vs. 94.5%), and without (60.3% vs. 70.9%) male-factor infertility. CONCLUSION(S): Mandates for IVF coverage were associated with lower ICSI use for non-male-factor infertility cycles. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Intracytoplasmic sperm injection; assisted reproductive technology; infertility; insurance mandate; male infertility

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29580644     DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.12.027

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Fertil Steril        ISSN: 0015-0282            Impact factor:   7.329


  9 in total

Review 1.  ALWAYS ICSI? A SWOT analysis.

Authors:  E Bosch; J J Espinós; F Fabregues; J Fontes; J García-Velasco; J Llácer; A Requena; M A Checa; J Bellver
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2020-06-24       Impact factor: 3.412

2.  The effect of ICSI in infertility couples with non-male factor: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ting Geng; Lin Cheng; Caiyun Ge; Yuanzhen Zhang
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2020-10-19       Impact factor: 3.412

3.  Is intracytoplasmic sperm (ICSI) better than traditional in vitro fertilization (IVF): confirmation of higher blastocyst rates per oocyte using a split insemination design.

Authors:  May-Tal Sauerbrun-Cutler; Warren J Huber; Phinnara Has; Chloe Shen; Richard Hackett; Ruben Alvero; Shunping Wang
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2020-05-20       Impact factor: 3.412

4.  Differences in ICSI utilization rates among states with insurance mandates for ART coverage.

Authors:  Pavel Zagadailov; Kyung S Cho; David B Seifer
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2021-11-30       Impact factor: 5.211

5.  Effectivity of conventional in vitro fertilization (IVF) and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) when male factor is absent: a perspective point of view.

Authors:  Marcelo Giacobbe; Maiara Conatti; Alecsandra Gomes; Tatiana Cs Bonetti; Pedro Aa Monteleone
Journal:  JBRA Assist Reprod       Date:  2022-01-17

Review 6.  Impact of in vitro fertilization state mandates for third party insurance coverage in the United States: a review and critical assessment.

Authors:  Benjamin J Peipert; Melissa N Montoya; Bronwyn S Bedrick; David B Seifer; Tarun Jain
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2022-08-04       Impact factor: 4.982

7.  Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection May Not Improve Clinical Outcomes Despite Its Positive Effect on Embryo Results: A Retrospective Analysis of 1130 Half-ICSI Treatments.

Authors:  Nan Peng; Shuiying Ma; Cheng Li; Hui Liu; Haibin Zhao; Lian-Jie Li; Qing Li; Mei Li
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2022-06-15       Impact factor: 6.055

8.  Do state insurance mandates alter ICSI utilization?

Authors:  Pavel Zagadailov; David B Seifer; He Shan; Shvetha M Zarek; Albert L Hsu
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2020-04-25       Impact factor: 5.211

9.  Online access to male factor infertility care: the challenge of finding a specialist.

Authors:  Arighno Das; Anne Darves-Bornoz; Tejas Joshi; Mary Kate Keeter; James M Wren; Nelson E Bennett; Robert E Brannigan; Joshua A Halpern
Journal:  F S Rep       Date:  2020-09-25
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.