Literature DB >> 33745082

Evaluating the unevaluated: a secondary analysis of the National Survey for Family Growth (NSFG) examining infertile women who did not access care.

Sameer Thakker1, Jesse Persily1, Paxton Voigt1, Jennifer Blakemore2, Frederick Licciardi2, Bobby B Najari3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To characterize the demographic differences between infertile/sub-fertile women who utilized infertility services vs. those that do not.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis of cross-sectional data obtained during the 2011-2013, 2013-2015, and 2015-2017 cycles of National Survey for Family Growth from interviews administered in home for randomly selected participants by a National Center of Health Statistics (NCHS) surveyor was used to analyze married, divorced, or women with long-term partners who reported difficulty having biological children (sub-fertile/infertile women). Demographic differences such as formal marital status, education, race, and religion were compared between women who presented for infertility care vs. those that did not. The primary outcome measure was presenting for infertility evaluation and subsequently utilizing infertility services. Healthcare utilization trends such as having a usual place of care and insurance status were also included as exposures of interest in the analysis.
RESULTS: Of the 12,456 women included in the analysis 1770 (15.3%) had used infertility services and 1011 (8.3%) said it would be difficult for them to have a child but had not accessed infertility services. On univariate analysis, compared to women who used infertility services, untreated women had lower average household incomes (295.3 vs. 229.8% of the federal poverty line respectively). Untreated women also had lower levels of education and were more likely to be divorced or never have married. In terms of health status, unevaluated women were less likely to have a usual place for healthcare (87.3%) as compared to women presenting for fertility care (91.9%) (p = 0.004). When examining insurance status, 23.3% of unevaluated women were uninsured as compared to 8.3% of evaluated women. On multivariate analysis, infertile women without insurance were at 0.37 odds of utilizing infertility care compared to women with insurance.
CONCLUSIONS: Demographic factors are associated with the utilization of infertility care. Insurance status is a significant predictor of whether or not infertile women will access treatment. Data from the three most recent NSFG surveys along with prior analyses demonstrate the need for expanded insurance coverage in order to address the socioeconomic disparities between infertile women who are accessing services vs. those that are not.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ART; Demographics; Disparity; Infertility; Insurance status; NSFG; Socioeconomic status; Sub-fertility; Unevaluated

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33745082      PMCID: PMC8190414          DOI: 10.1007/s10815-021-02149-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet        ISSN: 1058-0468            Impact factor:   3.412


  27 in total

1.  Utilization of infertility treatments: the effects of insurance mandates.

Authors:  Marianne P Bitler; Lucie Schmidt
Journal:  Demography       Date:  2012-02

2.  Geographic access to assisted reproductive technology health care in the United States: a population-based cross-sectional study.

Authors:  John A Harris; Marie N Menke; Jessica K Haefner; Michelle H Moniz; Chithra R Perumalswami
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2017-03-11       Impact factor: 7.329

3.  Planning and development of the continuous National Survey of Family Growth.

Authors:  Robert M Groves; William D Mosher; James M Lepkowski; Nicole G Kirgis
Journal:  Vital Health Stat 1       Date:  2009-09

Review 4.  Infertility around the globe: new thinking on gender, reproductive technologies and global movements in the 21st century.

Authors:  Marcia C Inhorn; Pasquale Patrizio
Journal:  Hum Reprod Update       Date:  2015-03-22       Impact factor: 15.610

5.  Supply of and demand for assisted reproductive technologies in the United States: clinic- and population-based data, 1995-2010.

Authors:  Elizabeth Hervey Stephen; Anjani Chandra; Rosalind Berkowitz King
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2015-10-24       Impact factor: 7.329

6.  Infertility service use among U.S. women: 1995 and 2002.

Authors:  Anjani Chandra; Elizabeth Hervey Stephen
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2008-12-18       Impact factor: 7.329

Review 7.  Access to and use of infertility services in the United States: framing the challenges.

Authors:  Eli Y Adashi; Laura A Dean
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2016-01-27       Impact factor: 7.329

8.  Women's involvement in clinical trials: historical perspective and future implications.

Authors:  Katherine A Liu; Natalie A Dipietro Mager
Journal:  Pharm Pract (Granada)       Date:  2016-03-15

9.  Quality of life and general health of infertile women.

Authors:  Azam Namdar; Mohammad Mehdi Naghizadeh; Marziyeh Zamani; Farideh Yaghmaei; Mohammad Hadi Sameni
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2017-07-12       Impact factor: 3.186

10.  How much is a child worth? Providers' and patients' views and responses concerning ethical and policy challenges in paying for ART.

Authors:  Robert Klitzman
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-02-16       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.