Dataset Information

Cost and efficacy comparison of in vitro fertilization and tubal anastomosis for women after tubal ligation.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To compare cost and efficacy of tubal anastomosis to in vitro fertilization (IVF) in women who desired fertility after a tubal ligation.

Design

Cost-effectiveness analysis.

Setting

Not applicable.

Patient(s)

Not applicable.

Intervention(s)

Not applicable.

Main outcome measure(s)

Cost per ongoing pregnancy.

Result(s)

Cost per ongoing pregnancy for women after tubal anastomosis ranged from $16,446 to $223,482 (2014 USD), whereas IVF ranged from $32,902 to $111,679 (2014 USD). Across maternal age groups <35 and 35-40, years tubal anastomosis was more cost effective than IVF for ongoing pregnancy. Sensitivity analyses validated these findings across a wide range of ongoing pregnancy probabilities as well as costs per procedure.

Conclusion(s)

Tubal anastomosis was the most cost-effective approach for most women less than 41 years of age, whereas IVF was the most cost-effective approach for women aged ≥41 years who desired fertility after tubal ligation. A model was created that can be modified based on cost and success rates in individual clinics for improved patient counseling.

SUBMITTER: Messinger LB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4710374 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cost and efficacy comparison of in vitro fertilization and tubal anastomosis for women after tubal ligation.

Messinger Lauren B LB Alford Connie E CE Csokmay John M JM Henne Melinda B MB Mumford Sunni L SL Segars James H JH Armstrong Alicia Y AY

Fertility and sterility 20150523 1

<h4>Objective</h4>To compare cost and efficacy of tubal anastomosis to in vitro fertilization (IVF) in women who desired fertility after a tubal ligation.<h4>Design</h4>Cost-effectiveness analysis.<h4>Setting</h4>Not applicable.<h4>Patient(s)</h4>Not applicable.<h4>Intervention(s)</h4>Not applicable.<h4>Main outcome measure(s)</h4>Cost per ongoing pregnancy.<h4>Result(s)</h4>Cost per ongoing pregnancy for women after tubal anastomosis ranged from $16,446 to $223,482 (2014 USD), whereas IVF range ...[more]

PMID: 26006734

Similar Datasets

Project description:Tubal ligation remains common in the USA, especially among low-income patients. To compare the effectiveness and safety of intrauterine contraceptives (IUC) to laparoscopic tubal ligation for Medicaid clients. We partnered with patient and clinician stakeholders to conduct a retrospective cohort study using California Medicaid claims for patients who had an IUC placed or laparoscopic tubal ligation performed in 2008-2014, excluding procedures performed within 42 days of a birth. We applied log-linear (Poisson) event-history regression models for clustered person-period data to adjust for sociodemographic variables and pre-procedure health status when examining associations between these contraceptive procedures and claims related to contraceptive failure, complications, and pain in the first year post-procedure. We identified 35,705 patients who had a levonorgestrel IUC placed, 23,628 patients who had a copper IUC placed, and 23,965 patients who underwent laparoscopic tubal ligation. In unadjusted analyses, rates of pregnancy within 1 year were similar following levonorgestrel IUC (2.40%) or copper IUC placement (2.99%) or tubal ligation (2.64%). In adjusted analyses, compared to tubal ligation, pregnancy was less common following placement of a levonorgestrel IUC (adj IRR 0.72, 95% CI 0.64-0.82) and similar with placement of a copper IUC (adj IRR 0.92, 95% CI 0.82-1.05). Procedural complications such as infection (0.35% vs. 2.91%) were significantly less common with IUC placement than tubal ligation. Claims for pelvic and abdominal pain decreased in frequency with time since all procedures; 6 to 12 months post-procedure, pelvic pain claims were less common after levonorgestrel IUC (adj IRR 0.69, 95% CI 0.65-0.73) or copper IUC placement (adj IRR 0.70, 95% CI 0.66-0.75) than tubal ligation. IUC appears at least as effective as laparoscopic tubal ligation at 1-year post-procedure with lower rates of infection and pelvic pain 6 to 12 months post-procedure. NCT03438682.

Project description:Background: Use of an in situ epidural catheter has been suggested to be efficient to provide anesthesia for postpartum tubal ligation (PPTL). Reported epidural reactivation success rates vary from 74% to 92%. Predictors for reactivation failure include poor patient satisfaction with labor analgesia, increased delivery-to-reactivation time and the need for top-ups during labor. Some have suggested that this high failure rate precludes leaving the catheter in situ after delivery for subsequent reactivation attempts. In this study, we sought to evaluate the success rate of neuraxial techniques for PPTL and to determine if predictors of failure can be identified. Methods: After obtaining IRB approval, a retrospective chart review of patients undergoing PPTL after vaginal delivery from July 2010 to July 2016 was conducted using CPT codes, yielding 93 records for analysis. Demographic, obstetric and anesthetic data (labor analgesia administration, length of epidural catheter in epidural space, top-up requirements, time of catheter reactivation, final anesthetic technique and corresponding doses for spinal and epidural anesthesia) were obtained. Results: A total of 70 patients received labor neuraxial analgesia. Reactivation was attempted in 33 with a success rate of 66.7%. Patient height, epidural volume of local anesthetic and administered fentanyl dose were lower in the group that failed reactivation. Overall, spinal anesthesia was performed in 60 patients, with a success rate of 80%. Conclusions: Our observed rate of successful postpartum epidural reactivation for tubal ligation was lower than the range reported in the literature. Our success rates for both spinal anesthesia and epidural reactivation for PPTL were lower than the generally accepted rates of successful epidural and spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery. This gap may reflect a lower level of motivation on behalf of both the patients and anesthesia providers to tolerate "imperfect" neuraxial anesthesia once fetal considerations are removed.

Dataset Information

Cost and efficacy comparison of in vitro fertilization and tubal anastomosis for women after tubal ligation.

Objective

Design

Setting

Patient(s)

Intervention(s)

Main outcome measure(s)

Result(s)

Conclusion(s)

Publications

Cost and efficacy comparison of in vitro fertilization and tubal anastomosis for women after tubal ligation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets