Developments in IVF warrant the adoption of new performance indicators for ART clinics, but do not justify the abandonment of patient-centred measures

Human Reproduction

Volumn 32, Issue 6, 2017, Pages 1155-1159

  Wilkinson, J ^a,b   Roberts, S A ^a   Vail, A ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

^b SALFORD ROYAL NHS FOUNDATION TRUST   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Cumulative live birth; Embryo; IVF; Live birth; Multiple pregnancy; National data; OHSS; Outcome measure; Safety; Success rates

Indexed keywords

BIRTH RATE; CONSULTATION; HOSPITAL; HUMAN; IN VITRO FERTILIZATION; INFERTILITY THERAPY; LIVE BIRTH; MEDICAL SOCIETY; OOCYTE RETRIEVAL; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT CARE; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; REVIEW; SAFETY; SINGLE EMBRYO TRANSFER; FAMILY SIZE; FEMALE; FEMALE INFERTILITY; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; MALE; MALE INFERTILITY; STANDARDS; STATISTICS; TRENDS;

BIRTH RATE; FAMILY CHARACTERISTICS; FEMALE; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; HUMANS; INFERTILITY, FEMALE; INFERTILITY, MALE; MALE; ORGANIZATIONAL CASE STUDIES; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PATIENT-CENTERED CARE; STATISTICS AS TOPIC;

EID: 85026910793     PISSN: 02681161     EISSN: 14602350     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dex063     Document Type: Review

References (26)

1. Abdalla HI, Bhattacharya S, Khalaf Y. Is meaningful reporting of national IVF outcome data possible? Hum Reprod 2010;25:9-13.
2. Abusief ME, Hornstein MD, Jain T. Assessment of United States fertility clinic websites according to the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM)/Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology (SART) guidelines. Fertil Steril 2007;87:88-92.
3. Bird SM, David C, Farewell VT, Harvey G, Tim H, Peter C. Performance indicators: good, bad, and ugly. J R Stat Soc Ser A Stat Soc 2005;168:1-27.
4. Braakhekke M, Kamphuis EI, Mol F, Norman RJ, Bhattacharya S, van der Veen F, Mol BWJ. Effectiveness and safety as outcome measures in reproductive medicine. Hum Reprod 2015;30:2249-2251.
5. Chetkowski RJ. Consumer-friendly reporting of in vitro fertilization outcomes. Fertil Steril 2014;101:e7.
6. Fleming R, Broekmans F, Calhaz-Jorge C, Dracea L, Alexander H, Andersen AN, Blockeel C, Jenkins J, Lunenfeld B, Platteau P et al. Can anti-Mullerian hormone concentrations be used to determine gonadotrophin dose and treatment protocol for ovarian stimulation? Reprod Biomed Online 2013;26:431-439.
7. Haagen EC, Tuil W, Hendriks J, de Bruijn RPJ, Braat DDM, Kremer JAM. Current Internet use and preferences of IVF and ICSI patients. Hum Reprod 2003;18:2073-2078.
8. Heijnen E, Macklon NS, Fauser B. What is the most relevant standard of success in assisted reproduction? The next step to improving outcomes of IVF: consider the whole treatment. Hum Reprod 2004;19: 1936-1938.
9. Huang JY, Discepola F, Al-Fozan H, Tulandi T. Quality of fertility clinic websites. Fertil Steril 2005;83:538-544.
10. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. Information for Quality Consultation. http://www.hfea.gov.uk/9633.html (12 January 2017, data last accessed).
11. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. Choose a Clinic (Beta Version). https://beta.hfea.gov.uk/ (12 January 2017, date last accessed).
12. Rawal N, Haddad N. Use of Internet in infertility patients. Int J Gynecol Obstet 2006;5:5.
13. Roberts SA, Hirst WM, Brison DR, Vail A, TowardSET Collaboration. Embryo and uterine influences on IVF outcomes: an analysis of a UK multi-centre cohort. Hum Reprod 2010;25:2792-2802.
14. Roberts SA, McGowan L, Hirst WM, Vail A, Rutherford A, Lieberman BA, Brison DR, Collaboration T. Reducing the incidence of twins from IVF treatments: predictive modelling from a retrospective cohort. Hum Reprod 2011;26:569-575.
15. Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. Find a Clinic. http://www.sart.org/find-a-clinic/ (12 January 2017, date last accessed).
16. Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. National Summary Report. https://www.sartcorsonline.com/rptCSR-PublicMultYear.aspx?ClinicPKID=0 (12 January 2017, date last accessed).
17. Steward RG, Lan L, Shah AA, Yeh JS, Price TM, Goldfarb JM, Muasher SJ. Oocyte number as a predictor for ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome and live birth: an analysis of 256,381 in vitro fertilization cycles. Fertil Steril 2014;101:967-973.
18. Sunkara SK, La Marca A, Seed PT, Khalaf Y. Increased risk of preterm birth and low birthweight with very high number of oocytes following IVF: an analysis of 65 868 singleton live birth outcomes. Hum Reprod 2015;30:1473-1480.
19. Sunkara SK, Rittenberg V, Raine-Fenning N, Bhattacharya S, Zamora J, Coomarasamy A. Association between the number of eggs and live birth in IVF treatment: an analysis of 400 135 treatment cycles. Hum Reprod 2011;26:1768-1774.
20. Talarczyk J, Hauke J, Poniewaz M, Serdynska-Szuster M, Pawelczyk L, Jedrzejczak P. Internet as a source of information about infertility among infertile patients. Ginekol Pol 2012;83:250-254.
21. Troude P, Guibert J, Bouyer J, de La Rochebrochard E, Grp D. Medical factors associated with early IVF discontinuation. Reprod Biomed Online 2014;28:321-329.
22. Vail A, Gardener E. Common statistical errors in the design and analysis of subfertility trials. Hum Reprod 2003;18:1000-1004.
23. Verberg MF, Eijkemans MJ, Heijnen EM, Broekmans FJ, de Klerk C, Fauser BC, Macklon NS. Why do couples drop-out from IVF treatment? A prospective cohort study. Hum Reprod 2008;23:2050-2055.
24. Walker AM. Confounding by indication. Epidemiology 1996;7:335-336.
25. Wilkinson J, Roberts SA, Showell M, Brison DR, Vail A. No common denominator: a review of outcome measures in IVF RCTs. Hum Reprod 2016;31:2714-2722.
26. Wilkinson J, Vail A, Roberts SA. Direct-to-consumer advertising of success rates for medically assisted reproduction: a review of national clinic websites. BMJ Open 2017;7:e01221.