- Record: found
- Abstract: found
- Article: found
TRANSPARENCY OF PUBLICLY AVAILABLE ART CHARGES ON U.S. CLINIC WEBSITES
Abstract
Background: Treatment for ART services is relatively expensive and encourages patients to compare charges among ART clinics. There continues to be increased demand for ART services. Along with these, one would expect increased online searches of ART treatments and corresponding charges. This study evaluated the transparency and informativeness of ART-associated charges publicly available on ART clinic websites across the U.S.
Study design: Evaluation of U.S. ART clinic websites was performed by three raters using a true/false rating scale to determine the availability of the ART- associated charges, including diagnosis, treatment, monitoring, medications, and laboratory services. We evaluated whether academic and non-academic medical centers, geographic location, clinic volume, or ART-mandated and non-mandated coverage for infertility treatment influence the transparency of ART charges. Interrater variability was assessed using modified Fleiss' kappa. Chi-Square analysis was used to test whether DHHS regions, academic versus non-academic hospitals, ART-mandated states versus non-mandated states, and the area's urban character influence the charges displayed. The role of the annual number of total ART cycles on ratings was assessed using the Pearson correlation.
Results: Of the 464 ART clinics evaluated, 84% (n=390) were classified as minimally transparent and informative regarding publicly available ART charges. Of DHHS-designated regions, Region 8 (Denver) had the highest transparency (57.1%, p<0.001) for information on fresh ART cycles. There were no differences among the remaining nine DHHS regions. The ART state mandate, academic affiliation, population density, urbanization level, and clinical volume were not associated with greater transparency of ART charges.
Conclusion: Many ART clinics demonstrate minimal transparency and informativeness of their charges on clinic websites. Analysis of the DHHS regions, ART-mandated states, the role of academia, population density, and level of urbanization suggests that the lack of transparency could be associated with current ART clinic-specific policies.
Content
Author and article information
References
Vollset Stein Emil, Goren Emily, Yuan Chun-Wei, Cao Jackie, Smith Amanda E, Hsiao Thomas, Bisignano Catherine, Azhar Gulrez S, Castro Emma, Chalek Julian, Dolgert Andrew J, Frank Tahvi, Fukutaki Kai, Hay Simon I, Lozano Rafael, Mokdad Ali H, Nandakumar Vishnu, Pierce Maxwell, Pletcher Martin, Robalik Toshana, Steuben Krista M, Wunrow Han Yong, Zlavog Bianca S, Murray Christopher J L. Fertility, mortality, migration, and population scenarios for 195 countries and territories from 2017 to 2100: a forecasting analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study. The Lancet. Vol. 396(10258):1285–1306. 2020. Elsevier BV. [Cross Ref]
Hamilton Brady, Martin Joyce, Osterman Michelle. Births: Provisional Data for 2020. 2021. National Center for Health Statistics. [Cross Ref]
Sun Hui, Gong Ting-Ting, Jiang Yu-Ting, Zhang Shuang, Zhao Yu-Hong, Wu Qi-Jun. Global, regional, and national prevalence and disability-adjusted life-years for infertility in 195 countries and territories, 1990–2017: results from a global burden of disease study, 2017. Aging. Vol. 11(23):10952–10991. 2019. Impact Journals, LLC. [Cross Ref]
Fleishon Howard B., Itri Jason N., Boland Giles W., Duszak Richard. Academic Medical Centers and Community Hospitals Integration: Trends and Strategies. Journal of the American College of Radiology. Vol. 14(1):45–51. 2017. Elsevier BV. [Cross Ref]
Busnelli Andrea, Somigliana Edgardo. Prognosis and cost-effectiveness of IVF in poor responders according to the Bologna Criteria. Minerva Obstetrics and Gynecology. Vol. 70(1)2018. Edizioni Minerva Medica. [Cross Ref]
Yilmaz Nafiye, Kara Mustafa, Coskun Bugra, Kaba Metin, Erkilinc Selçuk, Yenicesu Okan, Erkaya Salim. Perinatal outcomes and cost-effectivity of the assisted reproduction pregnancies with advanced age: A retrospective analysis. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. Vol. 37(4):450–453. 2017. Informa UK Limited. [Cross Ref]
Pham Clarabelle T, Karnon Jonathan D, Norman Robert J, Mol Ben W. Cost-effectiveness modelling of IVF in couples with unexplained infertility. Reproductive BioMedicine Online. Vol. 37(5):555–563. 2018. Elsevier BV. [Cross Ref]
Barriere Paul, Porcu-Buisson Géraldine, Hamamah Samir. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of the Gonadotropin Treatments HP-hMG and rFSH for Assisted Reproductive Technology in France: A Markov Model Analysis. Applied Health Economics and Health Policy. Vol. 16(1):65–77. 2018. Springer Science and Business Media LLC. [Cross Ref]
Neal Shelby A., Morin Scott J., Franasiak Jason M., Goodman Linnea R., Juneau Caroline R., Forman Eric J., Werner Marie D., Scott Richard T.. Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy is cost-effective, shortens treatment time, and reduces the risk of failed embryo transfer and clinical miscarriage. Fertility and Sterility. Vol. 110(5):896–904. 2018. Elsevier BV. [Cross Ref]
Zagadailov Pavel, Seifer David B., Shan He, Zarek Shvetha M., Hsu Albert L.. Do state insurance mandates alter ICSI utilization? Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology. Vol. 18(1)2020. Springer Science and Business Media LLC. [Cross Ref]