Van Voorhis B J, Stovall D W, Allen B D, Syrop C H
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City 52245, USA.
Fertil Steril. 1998 Dec;70(6):995-1005. doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(98)00341-0.
To review the published literature on the cost-effective approach to infertility treatment.
The literature on the economics and cost-effectiveness of infertility treatments was reviewed. Studies related to this topic were identified through MEDLINE.
RESULT(S): Few cost-effectiveness studies about infertility treatment have been published. In the absence of tubal blockage and severe male factor, use of IUI and hMG-IUI is more cost-effective than IVF. In vitro fertilization is at least as cost-effective as tubal surgery. Although IVF costs are high, they fall well within the range of other accepted medical treatments and are below the general public's willingness to pay for these treatments.
CONCLUSION(S): Cost-effectiveness analysis is an important means of improving quality of care while controlling costs. Further work regarding cost-effectiveness of treatments among different diagnostic groups is needed.
回顾已发表的关于不孕症治疗成本效益方法的文献。
对不孕症治疗的经济学和成本效益相关文献进行回顾。通过医学文献数据库（MEDLINE）识别与该主题相关的研究。
关于不孕症治疗的成本效益研究发表较少。在不存在输卵管阻塞和严重男性因素的情况下，使用宫内人工授精（IUI）和人绝经期促性腺激素-宫内人工授精（hMG-IUI）比体外受精（IVF）更具成本效益。体外受精至少与输卵管手术一样具有成本效益。尽管体外受精成本较高，但它们完全在其他公认的医疗治疗费用范围内，且低于公众对这些治疗的支付意愿。
成本效益分析是在控制成本的同时提高医疗质量的重要手段。需要进一步开展不同诊断组治疗成本效益的相关工作。
