Author(s)

Natalie M. Crawford^1*, Kashika M. Sahay², Jennifer E. Mersereau¹

¹Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
²Maternal and Child Heath University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.

Purpose: To compare the strategy for mild stimulation IVF versus conventional stimulation IVF. Methods: A decision tree analytic model was created to compare IVF with mild stimulation versus convention stimulation in infertile women <38 years of age to evaluate which strategy is the least costly per live birth. Results: Using base-case estimates of costs and probabilities in women <38 years old with unexplained infertility, the cumulative live birth rate in the mild versus conventional stimulation group was 15.8% versus 28.6%, respectively. The average cost for mild and convention IVF was $8789 and $14,364 per arm, respectively. In base case analysis, the ICER was $43,516 representing the additional cost per live birth with conventional IVF. One-way sensitivity analysis evaluated the robustness of the data and revealed a tradeoff in which mild IVF stimulation had lower total costs and also lower live births versus conventional stimulation. Conclusions: Mild stimulation IVF has a lower cost per cycle but is also associated with lower live birth rates. Patient care decisions should be individualized irrespective of cost.

Minimal Stimulation, Mild IVF, IVF, Decision Analysis, Cost Analysis

Crawford, N. , Sahay, K. and Mersereau, J. (2016) Mild Stimulation versus Conventional IVF: A Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation. Open Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 6, 180-188. doi: 10.4236/ojog.2016.63023.