32
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Availability, effectiveness and safety of ART in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          STUDY QUESTION

          What is the evidence pertaining to availability, effectiveness and safety of ART in sub-Saharan Africa?

          SUMMARY ANSWER

          According to overall limited and heterogeneous evidence, availability and utilization of ART are very low, clinical pregnancy rates largely compare to other regions but are accompanied by high multiple pregnancy rates, and in the near absence of data on deliveries and live births the true degree of effectiveness and safety remains to be established.

          WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

          In most world regions, availability, utilization and outcomes of ART are monitored and reported by national and regional ART registries. In sub-Saharan Africa there is only one national and no regional registry to date, raising the question what other evidence exists documenting the status of ART in this region.

          STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

          A systematic review was conducted searching Pubmed, Scopus, Africawide, Web Of Science and CINAHL databases from January 2000 to June 2017. A total of 29 studies were included in the review. The extracted data were not suitable for meta-analysis.

          PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

          The review was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA) guidelines. All peer-reviewed manuscripts irrespective of language or study design that presented original data pertaining to availability, effectiveness and safety of ART in sub-Saharan Africa were eligible for inclusion. Selection criteria were specified prior to the search. Two authors independently reviewed studies for possible inclusion and critically appraised selected manuscripts. Data were analysed descriptively, being unsuitable for statistical analysis.

          MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

          The search yielded 810 references of which 29 were included based on the predefined selection and eligibility criteria. Extracted data came from 23 single centre observational studies, two global ART reports, two reviews, one national data registry and one community-based study. ART services were available in 10 countries and delivered by 80 centres in six of these. Data pertaining to number of procedures existed from three countries totalling 4619 fresh non-donor aspirations in 2010. The most prominent barrier to access was cost. Clinical pregnancy rates ranged between 21.2% and 43.9% per embryo transfer but information on deliveries and live births were lacking, seriously limiting evaluation of ART effectiveness. When documented, the rate of multiple pregnancy was high with information on outcomes similarly lacking.

          LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

          The findings in this review are based on limited data from a limited number of countries, and are derived from heterogeneous studies, both in terms of study design and quality, many of which include small sample sizes. Although representing best available evidence, this requires careful interpretation regarding the degree of representativeness of the current status of ART in sub-Saharan Africa.

          WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

          The true extent and outcome of ART in sub-Saharan Africa could not be reliably documented as the relevant information was not available. Current efforts are underway to establish a regional ART data registry in order to report and monitor availability, effectiveness and safety of ART thus contributing to evidence-based practice and possible development strategies.

          STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS

          No funding was received for this study. The authors had no competing interests.

          TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

          PROSPERO CRD42016032336

          Related collections

          Most cited references35

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies world report: Assisted Reproductive Technology 2008, 2009 and 2010.

          What were utilization, outcomes and practices in assisted reproductive technology (ART) globally in 2008, 2009 and 2010?
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Cumulative live birth rate: time for a consensus?

            Traditionally, IVF success rates have been reported in terms of live birth per fresh cycle or embryo transfer. With the increasing use of embryo freezing and thawing it is essential that we report not only outcomes following fresh but also those after frozen embryo transfer as a complete measure of success of an IVF treatment. Most people agree that an individual's chance of having a baby following fresh and frozen embryo transfer should be described as cumulative live birth rate. However, views on the most appropriate parameters required to calculate such an outcome have been inconsistent. There is an additional dimension-time for all frozen embryos to be used up by a couple, which can influence the outcome. Given that cumulative live birth rate is generally perceived to be the preferred reporting system in IVF, it is time to have an international consensus on how this statistic is calculated, reported and interpreted by stakeholders across the world.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              An international survey of the health economics of IVF and ICSI.

              The health economics of IVF and ICSI involve assessments of utilization, cost, cost-effectiveness and ability to pay. In 48 countries, utilization averaged 289 IVF/ICSI cycles per million of population per annum, ranging from two in Kazachstan, to 1657 in Israel. Higher national utilization of IVF/ICSI was associated with higher quality of health services, as indicated by lower infant mortality rates. IVF and ICSI are scientifically demanding and personnel-intensive, and are therefore expensive procedures. The average cost per IVF/ICSI cycle in 2002 would be US$9547 in the USA, and US$3518 in 25 other countries. Price elasticity estimates suggest that a 10% decrease in IVF/ICSI cost would generate a 30% increase in utilization. The average cost-effectiveness ratios in 2002 would be US$58,394 per live birth in the USA, and US$22,048 in other countries. In three randomized controlled trials, incremental costs per additional live birth with IVF compared with conventional therapy were US$ -26,586, $79,472 and $47,749. The national costs of IVF/ICSI treatment would be US$1.00 per capita in one current model, but the costs to individual couples range from 10% of annual household expenditures in European countries to 25% in Canada and the USA.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Hum Reprod Open
                Hum Reprod Open
                hropen
                Human Reproduction Open
                Oxford University Press
                2399-3529
                2018
                26 March 2018
                26 March 2018
                : 2018
                : 2
                : hoy003
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Groote Schuur Hospital and Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Cape Town, Observatory 7925, Cape Town, South Africa
                [2 ]Clinical Research Centre, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Cape Town, Observatory 7925, Cape Town, South Africa
                Author notes
                Correspondence address. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Groote Schuur Hospital and Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Cape Town, Observatory 7925, Cape Town, South Africa. Tel: +27-21-404 4485; E-mail: silke.dyer@ 123456uct.ac.za
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3338-4189
                Article
                hoy003
                10.1093/hropen/hoy003
                6276690
                30895245
                fd28ead5-ef30-44aa-86fb-f11a8f4a9fdf
                © The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@ 123456oup.com

                History
                : 07 November 2017
                : 17 February 2018
                : 05 March 2018
                Page count
                Pages: 12
                Categories
                Review

                art,availability,ivf/icsi outcome,infertility,sub-saharan africa,registry

                Comments

                Comment on this article