• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

公立和私立诊所的辅助生殖技术。

Assisted reproductive technologies in public and private clinics.

机构信息

Unidad de Reproducción, HU Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, Spain.

出版信息

Reprod Biomed Online. 2009 Dec;19(6):872-8. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2009.09.028.

DOI:10.1016/j.rbmo.2009.09.028
PMID:20031031
Abstract

The aim of this study was to analyse the influence of the type of service provided by assisted reproduction clinics. The activities, treatment patterns and results achieved by assisted reproduction centres in Spain were examined, comparing public and private clinics. A retrospective study was carried out using the Assisted Reproductive Technology Register of the Spanish Fertility Society for 2002-2004. The results showed that 74%, 96% and 99% of IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection, oocyte donation and preimplantation genetic diagnosis cycles, respectively, were carried out in the private sector. Public clinics performed proportionally more transfers of three embryos than the private clinics (48.1% versus 41.7%). More elective transfers were performed in private clinics. Pregnancy rates per cycle started, per puncture and per transfer were significantly higher among private than public clinics (29.1%, 32.7% and 35.9% versus 25.2%, 28.5% and 32.6%, respectively) (P < 0.05). Implantation rate has risen year on year in both types of clinic and was significantly higher (P < 0.05), every year, among the private clinics. The multiple-pregnancy rate was significantly higher among the private clinics (30.8% versus 26.4%) (P < 0.05). In conclusion, differences exist between public and private clinics as regards to their volume of activity, the range of services offered, clinical practice and results achieved.

摘要

本研究旨在分析提供辅助生殖诊所服务类型的影响。研究考察了西班牙辅助生殖中心的活动、治疗模式和所取得的成果,并比较了公立和私立诊所。这项回顾性研究使用了西班牙生育协会的辅助生殖技术登记处,对 2002-2004 年的数据进行了分析。结果表明,分别有 74%、96%和 99%的体外受精/胞浆内单精子注射、卵母细胞捐赠和植入前遗传学诊断周期是在私立诊所进行的。公立诊所进行的三胚胎转移比例高于私立诊所(48.1%比 41.7%)。私立诊所进行了更多的选择性转移。每个周期开始、每次穿刺和每次转移的妊娠率在私立诊所中明显高于公立诊所(29.1%、32.7%和 35.9%比 25.2%、28.5%和 32.6%)(P<0.05)。两种类型的诊所的种植率都逐年上升,私立诊所的种植率明显更高(P<0.05)。私立诊所的多胎妊娠率也明显更高(30.8%比 26.4%)(P<0.05)。总之,公立和私立诊所在活动量、提供的服务范围、临床实践和取得的成果方面存在差异。

相似文献

1
Assisted reproductive technologies in public and private clinics.公立和私立诊所的辅助生殖技术。
Reprod Biomed Online. 2009 Dec;19(6):872-8. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2009.09.028.
2
Assisted reproductive technology in Europe, 2012: results generated from European registers by ESHRE.2012年欧洲辅助生殖技术:欧洲人类生殖与胚胎学会(ESHRE)基于欧洲登记处得出的结果
Hum Reprod. 2016 Aug;31(8):1638-52. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dew151. Epub 2016 Jun 19.
3
Assisted reproductive technologies (ART) in Canada: 2004 results from the Canadian ART Register.加拿大的辅助生殖技术(ART):2004年加拿大ART登记处的结果。
Fertil Steril. 2008 May;89(5):1123-1132. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.05.015. Epub 2007 Aug 13.
4
Assisted reproductive technology in Europe, 1999. Results generated from European registers by ESHRE.1999年欧洲的辅助生殖技术。欧洲人类生殖与胚胎学会(ESHRE)根据欧洲登记处的数据得出的结果。
Hum Reprod. 2002 Dec;17(12):3260-74. doi: 10.1093/humrep/17.12.3260.
5
ART in Europe, 2014: results generated from European registries by ESHRE: The European IVF-monitoring Consortium (EIM) for the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE).ART 在欧洲,2014:ESHRE 欧洲注册处产生的结果:欧洲人类生殖与胚胎学学会(ESHRE)的欧洲 IVF 监测联合组织(EIM)。
Hum Reprod. 2018 Sep 1;33(9):1586-1601. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dey242.
6
Comparison of IVF cycles reported in a voluntary ART registry with a mandatory registry in Spain.比较西班牙自愿性 ART 注册系统和强制性注册系统报告的 IVF 周期。
Hum Reprod. 2010 Dec;25(12):3066-71. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deq267. Epub 2010 Oct 13.
7
International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ICMART) world report: assisted reproductive technology 2004.国际辅助生殖技术监测委员会(ICMART)世界报告:辅助生殖技术 2004 年报告。
Hum Reprod. 2013 May;28(5):1375-90. doi: 10.1093/humrep/det036. Epub 2013 Feb 26.
8
Pregnancy outcomes after assisted human reproduction.人类辅助生殖后的妊娠结局
J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2014 Jan;36(1):64-83. doi: 10.1016/S1701-2163(15)30685-X.
9
Assisted reproductive technologies in Canada: 2005 results from the Canadian Assisted Reproductive Technologies Register.加拿大的辅助生殖技术:加拿大辅助生殖技术登记处2005年的结果
Fertil Steril. 2009 May;91(5):1721-30. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.02.125. Epub 2008 Apr 18.
10
Assisted reproductive technology in Europe, 2002. Results generated from European registers by ESHRE.2002年欧洲辅助生殖技术。欧洲人类生殖与胚胎学会(ESHRE)根据欧洲登记处的数据得出的结果。
Hum Reprod. 2006 Jul;21(7):1680-97. doi: 10.1093/humrep/del075. Epub 2006 Apr 3.

引用本文的文献

1
Psychosocial aspects of infertility and the impact of assisted reproductive techniques - a comprehensive review.不孕症的心理社会因素及辅助生殖技术的影响——一项综述
JBRA Assist Reprod. 2025 Apr 30;29(2):378-93. doi: 10.5935/1518-0557.20250002.
2
Analyzing assisted reproductive treatment representations in Italy and Spain through newspapers.通过报纸分析意大利和西班牙的辅助生殖治疗呈现情况。
Front Psychol. 2024 Oct 23;15:1451663. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1451663. eCollection 2024.
3
Assisted reproduction in Spain, outcome and socioeconomic determinants of access.
西班牙的辅助生殖技术、结局及获得途径的社会经济学决定因素。
Int J Equity Health. 2021 Jul 6;20(1):156. doi: 10.1186/s12939-021-01438-x.
4
Outcomes of Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Single Gene Defects in a Privately Funded Period and Publicly Funded Period: A North-American Single Center Experience.私人资助阶段和公共资助阶段单基因缺陷植入前基因检测的结果:北美单中心经验
J Reprod Infertil. 2020 Apr-Jun;21(2):107-115.
5
Embryologists' health: a nationwide online questionnaire.胚胎学家的健康状况:一项全国性在线问卷调查
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2014 Dec;31(12):1587-97. doi: 10.1007/s10815-014-0352-7. Epub 2014 Oct 5.
6
The Oncofertility Consortium--addressing fertility in young people with cancer.肿瘤生殖学联合会——关注癌症青年的生育力。
Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2010 Aug;7(8):466-75. doi: 10.1038/nrclinonc.2010.81. Epub 2010 May 25.