Is IVF—served two different ways—more cost-effective than IUI with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation?

RI Tjon-Kon-Fat, AJ Bensdorp, PMM Bossuyt, C Koks, GJE Oosterhuis, A Hoek, P Hompes, FJ Broekmans, HR Verhoeve, JP De Bruin, R Van Golde, S Repping, BJ Cohlen, MDA Lambers, PF Van Bommel, E Slappendel, D Perquin, J Smeenk, MJ Pelinck, J Gianotten, DA Hoozemans, JWM Maas, H Groen, MJC Eijkemans, F Van Der Veen, BWJ Mol, M Van Wely
2015-10-01
Abstract:STUDY QUESTION What is the cost-effectiveness of in vitro fertilization (IVF) with conventional ovarian stimulation, single embryo transfer (SET) and subsequent cryocycles or IVF in a modified natural cycle (MNC) compared with intrauterine insemination with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (IUI-COH) as a first-line treatment in couples with unexplained subfertility and an unfavourable prognosis on natural conception?. SUMMARY ANSWER Both IVF strategies are significantly more expensive when compared with IUI-COH, without being significantly more effective. In the comparison between IVF-MNC and IUI-COH, the latter is the dominant strategy. Whether IVF-SET is cost-effective depends on society's willingness to pay for an additional healthy child. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY IUI-COH and IVF, either after conventional ovarian stimulation or in a …
What problem does this paper attempt to address?