Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorHernandez-Torres, E
dc.contributor.authorNavarro Espigares, José Luis 
dc.contributor.authorClavero, A
dc.contributor.authorLopez-Regalado, ML
dc.contributor.authorCamacho Ballesta, José Antonio 
dc.contributor.authorOnieva-Garcia, MA
dc.contributor.authorMartinez, L
dc.contributor.authorCastilla Alcalá, José Antonio 
dc.date.accessioned2025-01-20T08:37:54Z
dc.date.available2025-01-20T08:37:54Z
dc.date.issued2015
dc.identifier.citationHernandez Torres E, Navarro-Espigares JL, Clavero A, López-Regalado M, Camacho-Ballesta JA, Onieva-García M, Martínez L, Castilla JA. Economic evaluation of elective single-embryo transfer with subsequent single frozen embryo transfer in an in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection program. Fertil Steril. 2015 Mar;103(3):699-706.es_ES
dc.identifier.otherPMID: 25557244
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10481/99627
dc.description.abstractTo analyze the cost-effectiveness of IVF-ICSI cycles with elective single-embryo transfer (eSET), plus elective single frozen embryo transfer (eSFET) if pregnancy is not achieved, compared with double-embryo transfer (DET). Design: Cost-effectiveness analysis. Setting: Public hospital. Patient(s): A population of 121 women (<38 years old), undergoing their first or second IVF cycles. Intervention(s): We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis using the results of a prospective clinical trial. The women in group 1 received eSET plus eSFET, and those in group 2 received DET. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed. Main outcome measure(s): Live birth delivery rate. Result(s): The cumulative live birth delivery rate was 38.60% in the eSET+eSFET group versus 42.19% in the DET group. The mean costs per patient were €5,614.11 in the eSET+eSFET group and €5,562.29 in the DET group. These differences were not statistically significant. The rate of multiple gestation was significantly lower in the eSET group than in the DET group (0 vs. 25.9%). Conclusion(s): This study does not show that eSET is superior to DET in terms of effectiveness or of costs. The lack of superiority of the results for the eSET+eSFET and the DET groups corroborates that the choice of strategy to be adopted should be determined by the context of the health care system and the individual prognosis.es_ES
dc.language.isoenges_ES
dc.publisherElsevieres_ES
dc.subjectEconomic evaluationes_ES
dc.subjectprobabilistic sensitivity analysises_ES
dc.subjectassisted reproduction,es_ES
dc.subjectsingle-embryo transferes_ES
dc.titleEconomic evaluation of elective single-embryo transfer with subsequent single frozen embryo transfer in an in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection programes_ES
dc.typejournal articlees_ES
dc.rights.accessRightsopen accesses_ES
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.11.032
dc.type.hasVersionAMes_ES


Files in this item

[PDF]

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record