Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Developments in IVF warrant the adoption of new performance indicators for ART clinics, but do not justify the abandonment of patient-centred measures.
Wilkinson, J; Roberts, S A; Vail, A.
Afiliación
  • Wilkinson J; Centre for Biostatistics, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre (MAHSC), University of Manchester, Room 1.315, Jean McFarlane Building, University Place, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
  • Roberts SA; Research and Development, Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust, Summerfield House, Stott Lane, Salford, M6 8HD, UK.
  • Vail A; Centre for Biostatistics, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre (MAHSC), University of Manchester, Room 1.315, Jean McFarlane Building, University Place, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
Hum Reprod ; 32(6): 1155-1159, 2017 06 01.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28369394
Recent advances in embryo freezing technology together with growing concerns over multiple births have shifted the paradigm of appropriate IVF. This has led to the adoption of new performance indicators for ART clinics by national reporting schemes, such as those curated by the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology (SART) and the Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority (HFEA). Using these organizations as case studies, we review several outcome measures from a statistical perspective. We describe several denominators that are used to calculate live birth rates. These include cumulative birth rates calculated from all fresh and frozen transfer procedures arising from a particular egg collection or cycle initiation, and live birth rates calculated per embryo transferred. Using data from both schemes, we argue that all cycles should be included in the denominator, regardless of whether or not egg collection and fertilization were successful. Excluding cancelled cycles reduces the impact of confounding due to patient characteristics but also removes policy and performance differences which we argue represent relevant sources of variation. It may be misleading to present prospective patients with essentially hypothetical measures of performance predicated on parity of ovarian stimulation and transfer policies. Although live birth per embryo has the advantage of encouraging single embryo transfer, we argue that it is prone to misinterpretation. This is because the likelihood of live birth is not proportional to the number of embryos transferred. We conclude that it is not possible to present a single measure that encompasses both effectiveness and safety. Instead, we propose that a set of clear, relevant outcome indicators is necessary to enable subfertile patients to make informed choices regarding whether and where to be treated.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Fertilización In Vitro / Evaluación de Resultado en la Atención de Salud / Atención Dirigida al Paciente / Infertilidad Femenina / Infertilidad Masculina Límite: Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: Hum Reprod Asunto de la revista: MEDICINA REPRODUTIVA Año: 2017 Tipo del documento: Article Pais de publicación: Reino Unido

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Fertilización In Vitro / Evaluación de Resultado en la Atención de Salud / Atención Dirigida al Paciente / Infertilidad Femenina / Infertilidad Masculina Límite: Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: Hum Reprod Asunto de la revista: MEDICINA REPRODUTIVA Año: 2017 Tipo del documento: Article Pais de publicación: Reino Unido