Literature DB >> 9660415

The economic cost of infertility-related services: an examination of the Massachusetts infertility insurance mandate.

M Griffin1, W F Panak.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine the costs and outcomes of infertility-related services in Massachusetts during a time of expanded use of assisted reproductive technology (ART).
DESIGN: Cost data were obtained from the Massachusetts Department of Insurance Rate-Setting Commission and 9 large group insurance plans for the period 1986-1993. Utilization and success rates of ART were examined, and the cost per live delivery with the use of ART in 1993 was estimated.
SETTING: The state of Massachusetts, in which access to infertility-related services has been mandated by law since 1989. PATIENT(S): The study population consisted of 8 large health maintenance organization plans and the Blue Cross/Blue Shield indemnity plan. INTERVENTION(S): None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Per capita infertility-related expenditures, infertility-related expenditures as a percentage of total expenditures, live deliveries per initiated ART cycle, and cost per live delivery. RESULT(S): Expenditures for infertility services increased at a rate similar to or slower than inflation during the years 1988-1992. Increases were slowest in health maintenance organizations, probably as a result of provider arrangements. Infertility services accounted for 0.41% of total expenditures within the indemnity plan in 1993 (approximately $1.71 per contract-month). Examination of ART utilization showed no evidence of overutilization by patients with a low chance of success. The cost per live delivery with the use of ART in 1993 was $59,484. CONCLUSION(S): Mandated infertility coverage was associated with increased use of ART but not with excessive increases in consumer cost for infertility insurance coverage.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9660415     DOI: 10.1016/s0015-0282(98)00107-1

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


  7 in total

Review 1.  Infertility: from a personal to a public health problem.

Authors:  A T Fidler; J Bernstein
Journal:  Public Health Rep       Date:  1999 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.792

2.  Expensive but worth it: older parents' attitudes and opinions about the costs and insurance coverage for in vitro fertilization.

Authors:  Robert D Nachtigall; Kirstin MacDougall; Anne C Davis; Yewoubdar Beyene
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2011-11-25       Impact factor: 7.329

3.  Insuring against infertility: expanding state infertility mandates to include fertility preservation technology for cancer patients.

Authors:  Daniel Basco; Lisa Campo-Engelstein; Sarah Rodriguez
Journal:  J Law Med Ethics       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 1.718

4.  Effects of infertility insurance mandates on fertility.

Authors:  Lucie Schmidt
Journal:  J Health Econ       Date:  2006-11-28       Impact factor: 3.804

5.  Policy efforts to prevent ART-related preterm birth.

Authors:  Blair Johnson; Wendy Chavkin
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2006-10-25

Review 6.  Insurance coverage of male infertility: what should the standard be?

Authors:  James M Dupree
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2018-07

Review 7.  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 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.