Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 2/2019

01-02-2019 | Assisted Reproduction Technologies

Business models and provider satisfaction in in vitro fertilization centers in the USA

Authors: J. E. McLaughlin, J. F. Knudtson, R. S. Schenken, N. S. Ketchum, J. A. Gelfond, T. A. Chang, R. D. Robinson

Published in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics | Issue 2/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

The number of in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles is increasing and the majority of patients undergoing IVF pay out of pocket. Reproductive endocrinology and infertility practitioners employ different business models to help create financial pathways for patients needing IVF but details regarding the different types of business models being used and physician satisfaction with those models have not been described previously.

Methods

A cross-sectional survey was sent to members of the Society of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility. The survey included 30 questions designed to assess demographics, practice patterns, and business models utilized.

Results

A total of 222/736 (30%) physicians responded to the survey. The majority of physicians offer a-la-carte (67%), bundled services (69%), grants (57%), and cost/risk-sharing (50%). The majority answered that the single ideal business model is bundled services (53%). There was no significant association between financial package offered and region of practice or state-mandated insurance. The largest barrier to care reported was cost with or without state-mandated coverage (94% and 99%, respectively). The majority of practices are satisfied with their business model (75%). Higher physician satisfaction was associated with private practice [69% vs 27%; OR (95%CI) = 3.8 (1.7, 8.6)], male gender [59% vs 30%; OR = 2.4 (1.1, 5.4)], and offering bundled services [83% vs 59%; OR = 2.8 (1.2, 6.7)].

Conclusions

Physicians utilize a variety of business models and most are satisfied with their current model. Cost is the major barrier to care in states with and without mandated coverage.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Quinn M, Fujimoto V. Racial and ethnic disparities in assisted reproductive technology access and outcomes. Fertil Steril. 2016;105(5):1119–23.CrossRefPubMed Quinn M, Fujimoto V. Racial and ethnic disparities in assisted reproductive technology access and outcomes. Fertil Steril. 2016;105(5):1119–23.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Murugappan G, Ohno MS, Lathi RB. Cost-effectiveness analysis of preimplantation genetic screening and in vitro fertilization versus expectant management in patients with unexplained recurrent pregnancy loss. Fertil Steril. 2015;103(5):1215–20.CrossRefPubMed Murugappan G, Ohno MS, Lathi RB. Cost-effectiveness analysis of preimplantation genetic screening and in vitro fertilization versus expectant management in patients with unexplained recurrent pregnancy loss. Fertil Steril. 2015;103(5):1215–20.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Sunderam S, Kissin DM, Crawford SB, Folger SG, Jamieson DJ, Warner L, et al. Assisted reproductive technology surveillance—United States, 2013. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2015;64:1–25.CrossRefPubMed Sunderam S, Kissin DM, Crawford SB, Folger SG, Jamieson DJ, Warner L, et al. Assisted reproductive technology surveillance—United States, 2013. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2015;64:1–25.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Barnhart KT, Nakajima ST, Puscheck E, Price TM, Baker VL, Segars J. Practice patterns, satisfaction, and demographics of reproductive endocrinologists: results of the 2014 Society for Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility Workforce Survey. Fertil Steril. 2016;105(5):1281–6.CrossRefPubMed Barnhart KT, Nakajima ST, Puscheck E, Price TM, Baker VL, Segars J. Practice patterns, satisfaction, and demographics of reproductive endocrinologists: results of the 2014 Society for Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility Workforce Survey. Fertil Steril. 2016;105(5):1281–6.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Financial “risk-sharing” or refund programs in assisted reproduction: an Ethics Committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2016;106(5):e8–e11.CrossRef Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Financial “risk-sharing” or refund programs in assisted reproduction: an Ethics Committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2016;106(5):e8–e11.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap) – a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42(2):377–81.CrossRefPubMed Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap) – a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42(2):377–81.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Neumann PJ, Gharib SD, Weinstein MC. The cost of a successful delivery with in vitro fertilization. N Engl J Med. 1994;331:239–43.CrossRefPubMed Neumann PJ, Gharib SD, Weinstein MC. The cost of a successful delivery with in vitro fertilization. N Engl J Med. 1994;331:239–43.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Jain T, Harlow BL, Hornstein MD. Insurance coverage and outcomes of in vitro fertilization. N Engl J Med. 2002;347(9):661–6.CrossRefPubMed Jain T, Harlow BL, Hornstein MD. Insurance coverage and outcomes of in vitro fertilization. N Engl J Med. 2002;347(9):661–6.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Levy MJ. Panel one: marketing strategies and informing the patient/consumer. A fertility center describes its shared-risk program. Womens Health Issues. 1997;7:172–6 discussion 86–7.CrossRefPubMed Levy MJ. Panel one: marketing strategies and informing the patient/consumer. A fertility center describes its shared-risk program. Womens Health Issues. 1997;7:172–6 discussion 86–7.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Stassart JP, Bayless RB, Casey CL, Phipps WR. Initial experience with a risk-sharing in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer program with novel features. Fertil Steril. 2011;95(7):2192–7.CrossRefPubMed Stassart JP, Bayless RB, Casey CL, Phipps WR. Initial experience with a risk-sharing in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer program with novel features. Fertil Steril. 2011;95(7):2192–7.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Disparities in access to effective treatment for infertility in the United States: an Ethics Committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2015;104(5):1104–10.CrossRef Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Disparities in access to effective treatment for infertility in the United States: an Ethics Committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2015;104(5):1104–10.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Rizvi R, Raymer L, Kunik M, Fisher J. Facets of career satisfaction for women physicians in the United States: a systematic review. Women Health. 2012;52(4):403–21.CrossRefPubMed Rizvi R, Raymer L, Kunik M, Fisher J. Facets of career satisfaction for women physicians in the United States: a systematic review. Women Health. 2012;52(4):403–21.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Clem KJ, Promes SB, Glickman SW, Shah A, Finkel MA, Pietrobon R, et al. Factors enhancing career satisfaction among female emergency physicians. Ann Emerg Med. 2008;51(6):723–8.CrossRefPubMed Clem KJ, Promes SB, Glickman SW, Shah A, Finkel MA, Pietrobon R, et al. Factors enhancing career satisfaction among female emergency physicians. Ann Emerg Med. 2008;51(6):723–8.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Liu M, Wronski L. Examining completion rates in web surveys via over 25,000 real-world surveys. Soc Sci Comput Rev. 2018;36(1):116–24.CrossRef Liu M, Wronski L. Examining completion rates in web surveys via over 25,000 real-world surveys. Soc Sci Comput Rev. 2018;36(1):116–24.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Business models and provider satisfaction in in vitro fertilization centers in the USA
Authors
J. E. McLaughlin
J. F. Knudtson
R. S. Schenken
N. S. Ketchum
J. A. Gelfond
T. A. Chang
R. D. Robinson
Publication date
01-02-2019
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics / Issue 2/2019
Print ISSN: 1058-0468
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7330
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-018-1368-1

Other articles of this Issue 2/2019

Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 2/2019 Go to the issue