Analysis of costs and results of assisted reproductive technologies in the world and Ukraine
Taking into account the demographic situation in Ukraine, the use of assisted reproductive technologies (ART) is an urgent task for increasing access to modern, expensive methods of infertility treatment.
The aim of this study was to summarize the legislative requirements for the implementation of ART, the number of cycles, depending on the type, and the costs for ART in the leading countries of the world and in Ukraine. We showed, that most countries in Europe have budgetary financing for a certain number of cycles, while the medical restrictions and age requirements for parents are included. It was revealed that the highest costs for ART are in the USA, the lowest in Japan and Scandinavian countries.
We calculated the rate of provision for IVF and ICSI cycles per 1 million population (Kart) and the countries were ranked into 3 groups. It was shown that Ukraine belongs to countries with a low indicator ‒ less than 500 cycles. Leading countries of Europe, which have government funding for ART (France, Germany, Sweden), are characterized by a high Kart. The need to increase budgetary financing for ART in Ukraine is shown.
The cost analysis for ART according to official websites of private clinics was conducted in Ukraine. We established that the average cost per 1 cycle of IVF was 52 584 UAH, for 1 cycle of ICSI was 6 694 UAH. The calculated solvency adequacy ratio for IVF was 703, it indicates a low availability for the population, and for ICSI is 89, which in 7.9 more affordable for families.
It was found that in 7 clinics there are no Internet pages, and on the websites of 12 clinics information on the cost of services is shown, without taking into account the use of drugs in the protocols of ART. According to the different approaches to informing on websites of the ART clinics, it is advisable to unify the information providing on the sites about the availability of cycles and the total costs for them to improve provision and access for patients. Therefore, it is important to increase the state funding for ART programs.
2. Nakaz MOZ Ukrayiny vid 09. 09. 2013 r. № 787 «Pro zatverdzhennya Poryadku zastosuvannya dopomizhnykh reproduktyvnykh tekhnolohiy v Ukrayini» [Elektronnyy resurs]. – Rezhym dostupu: http: //www.moz.gov.ua
3. Informatsiyno-statystychnyy dovidnyk pro dopomizhni reproduktyvni tekhnolohiyi v Ukrayini [Elektronnyy resurs]. – Rezhym dostupu: http://www.uarm.org.ua/ materiali/natsionalnij-reestr-drt.html
4. Koefitsiyent adekvatnosti platospromozhnosti [Elektronnyy resurs]. – Rezhym dostupu: http://www.pharmencyclopedia.com.ua/article/8076/koeficiyent-adekvatnosti-platospromozhnosti
5. Berg K., Cadier B., Chevreul K. The diversity of regulation and public financing of IVF in Europe and its impact on utilization // Human reproduction. – 2013. – V. 28, N 3. – Р. 666–675.
6. Prag P., Mills M. Assisted Reproductive Technology in Europe: Usage and Regulation in the Context of Cross-Border Reproductive Care / Childlessness in Europe: Contexts, Causes, and Consequences. – Р. 155–158 [Electronic resource]. – Access mode: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-44667-7_14
7. Calhaz-Jorge С. Assisted reproductive technology in Europe, 2013: results generated from European registers by ESHRE // Human Reproduction. – 2017. – V. 32, N 10. – P. 1957–1973.
8. Lesovs'ka S. H. Stan vprovadzhennya dopomizhnykh reproduktyvnykh tekhnolohiy v Ukrayini // Aktual'no. – 2017. – № 8 [Elektronnyy resurs]. – Rezhym dostupu: http://ozdorovie.com.ua/stan-vprovadzhennya-dopomizhnih-reproduktivnih-tehnologiy-v-ukrayini/#acceptLicense
9. Chambers G., Sullivan E., Ho M. Assisted reproductive technology treatment costs of a live birth: an age-stratified cost–outcome study of treatment in Australia // Pubmed. – 2006. – V. 184, N 4. – Р. 155–158 [Electronic resource]. – Access mode: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16489897
10. Dik J., Habbema F. Is affordable and cost-effective assisted reproductive technology in low-income countries possible? What should we know to answer the question? // ESHRE Monograph. – 2008. – N 1. – P. 1–24.
11. Zalis'ka O. M., Horbachevs'ka KH.-O. YA., Huz V. S. Farmakoekonomichni pidkhody do otsinky dopomizhnykh reproduktyvnykh tekhnolohiy // Farmats. chasopys. – 2012. – № 2. – S. 142–144.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.