University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.
University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.
Fertil Steril. 2023 Jul;120(1):72-79. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2023.02.015. Epub 2023 Feb 20.
To study the effect of socioeconomic status on the use of fertility treatment and the rate of live birth in men with subfertility.
A retrospective, time-to-event analysis of men with subfertility in Utah stratified by socioeconomic status.
Patients seen in fertility clinics throughout Utah.
PATIENT(S): All men in Utah undergoing semen analysis between 1998 and 2017 at the state's 2 largest health care networks.
INTERVENTION(S): Socioeconomic status (defined as area deprivation index of patients' residential location).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Categorical use of fertility treatment, the count of fertility treatments (in patients with ≥1 treatment), and live birth after semen analysis.
RESULT(S): When controlling for age, ethnicity, and semen parameters (count and concentration), men from low socioeconomic areas were only 60%-70% as likely to use fertility treatment depending on type compared with men from high socioeconomic areas (intrauterine insemination [IUI] hazards ratio [HR] = 0.691 (0.581-0.821), P<.001; in vitro fertilization [IVF] HR = 0.602 (0.466-0.778), P<.001). Of men undergoing fertility treatment, those from low socioeconomic areas had 75%-80% the number of treatments as men from high socioeconomic areas depending on type (IUI incident rate ratio = 0.740 (0.645-0.847), P<.001; IVF incident rate ratios = 0.803 (0.585-1.094), P=.170). When controlling for age, ethnicity, semen parameters, and use of fertility treatment, men from low socioeconomic areas were only 87% as likely to experience a live birth as men from high socioeconomic areas (HR = 0.871 (0.820-0.925), P<.001). Given the overall higher likelihood of live birth in men from high socioeconomic areas, as well as their greater chance of using fertility treatment, we predicted an annual disparity of 5 additional live births in high socioeconomic men compared with low for every 100 men.
CONCLUSION(S): Men from low socioeconomic areas undergoing semen analyses are significantly less likely to use fertility treatment and experience a live birth than their counterparts from high socioeconomic areas. Mitigation programs to increase access to fertility treatment may help to reduce this bias; however, our results suggest that additional discrepancies beyond fertility treatment require addressing.
研究社会经济地位对不育男性生育治疗的使用和活产率的影响。
对犹他州按社会经济地位分层的不育男性进行回顾性、事件时间分析。
在犹他州的两个最大的医疗保健网络中进行生育治疗的男性。
1998 年至 2017 年间在该州的 2 个最大的医疗保健网络中进行精液分析的所有男性。
社会经济地位(定义为患者居住地点的区域剥夺指数)。
生育治疗的分类使用、接受≥1 次生育治疗的患者生育治疗次数、精液分析后的活产。
在控制年龄、种族和精液参数(数量和浓度)后,与高社会经济地位地区的男性相比,低社会经济地位地区的男性使用生育治疗的可能性仅为 60%-70%,具体取决于治疗类型(宫腔内人工授精[IUI]的危险比[HR]为 0.691(0.581-0.821),P<.001;体外受精[IVF]的 HR 为 0.602(0.466-0.778),P<.001)。在接受生育治疗的男性中,低社会经济地位地区的治疗次数比高社会经济地位地区的男性少 75%-80%,具体取决于治疗类型(IUI 发生率比为 0.740(0.645-0.847),P<.001;IVF 的发生率比为 0.803(0.585-1.094),P=.170)。在控制年龄、种族、精液参数和生育治疗的使用后,低社会经济地位地区的男性经历活产的可能性仅为高社会经济地位地区男性的 87%(HR=0.871(0.820-0.925),P<.001)。考虑到高社会经济地位地区男性整体活产的可能性更高,以及他们更有可能接受生育治疗,我们预测,每 100 名男性中,高社会经济地位地区的男性比低社会经济地位地区的男性每年多 5 个额外的活产。
与高社会经济地位地区的男性相比,进行精液分析的低社会经济地位地区的男性使用生育治疗和实现活产的可能性显著降低。增加生育治疗机会的缓解计划可能有助于减少这种偏见;然而,我们的研究结果表明,除了生育治疗之外,还需要解决其他差异。