Forskning
Udskriv Udskriv
Switch language
Rigshospitalet - en del af Københavns Universitetshospital
Udgivet

Evaluation, Treatment, and Insurance Coverage for Couples With Male Factor Infertility in the US: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Survey Data

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  1. Renal Branch Artery Stenosis: A Diagnostic Challenge? A Case Report With Review of the Literature

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftReviewForskningpeer review

  2. Testicular Sperm Sampling by Subcapsular Orchiectomy in Klinefelter Patients: A New Simplified Treatment Approach

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  3. What is the intensity and cost of managing patients on active surveillance for prostate cancer? Urology

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftKonferenceabstrakt i tidsskriftForskning

  • Clara Helene Glazer
  • Jake Anderson-Bialis
  • Deborah Anderson-Bialis
  • Michael L Eisenberg
Vis graf over relationer

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the evaluation, treatment, and insurance coverage among couples with male factor infertility in the United States.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cohort of 969 couples undergoing fertility treatment with a diagnosis of male factor infertility were identified from an online survey. The proportion of men that were seen/not seen by a male were compared. Insurance coverage related to male factor was also assessed.

RESULTS: Overall, 98.0% of the men reported at least one abnormal semen parameter. Of these, 72.0% were referred to a male fertility specialist with the majority being referred by the gynecologist of their female partner. As part of the male evaluation, 72.2% had blood hormone testing. Of the 248 men who were not recommended to see a male fertility specialist, 96.0% had an abnormal semen analysis including 7.6% who had azoospermia. Referral to a male fertility specialist was largely driven by severity of male factor infertility rather than socioeconomic status. Insurance coverage related to male factor infertility was poor with low coverage for sperm extractions (72.9% reported 0-25% coverage) and sperm freezing (83.7% reported 0-25% coverage).

CONCLUSION: Although this cohort includes couples with abnormal semen parameters, 28% of the men were not evaluated by a male fertility specialist. In addition, insurance coverage for services related to male factor was low. These findings may be of concern as insufficient evaluation and coverage of the infertile man could lead to missed opportunities for identifying reversible causes of infertility/medical comorbidities and places an unfair burden on the female partner.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftUrology
Vol/bind139
Sider (fra-til)97-102
Antal sider7
ISSN0090-4295
DOI
StatusUdgivet - maj 2020

Bibliografisk note

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

ID: 59632839