Nuevo trabajo colaborativo con la participación de "Clínicas GINEMED"

Una de las revistas de mayor impacto a nivel mundial en el campo de la reproducción publica en su versión escrita (ya lo hizo en la versión on line) el siguiente trabajo colaborativo en el ha participado "Clínicas GINEMED".


Willingness to pay and conjoint analysis
to determine women’s preferences for
ovarian stimulating hormones in the
treatment of infertility in Spain

A. Palumbo1, P. De La Fuente2, M. Rodrı´guez3, F. Sa´nchez4,
J. Martı´nez-Salazar5, M. Mun˜oz6, J. Marqueta7, J. Herna´ndez1,
O. Espallardo8, C. Polanco8,*, S. Paz9, and L. Liza´n9
1FIVAP, Santa Cruz de Tenerife 38204, Spain 2CEFIVA, Oviedo 33011, Spain 3IVI Castello´ n, Castello´n 12004, Spain 4GINEMED, Sevilla
41001, Spain 5IVI Madrid, Madrid 28023, Spain 6IVI Alicante, Alicante 03015, Spain 7IBILAB, Palma de Mallorca 07011, Spain 8Health
Economics and Outcomes Research, Merck, S.L. (an affiliate of Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany), Maria de Molina, 40, 28006 Madrid,
Spain 9Outcomes’10, Castello´n 12002, Spain
*Correspondence address. Tel: +34-917-453-158; Fax: +34-917-454-444; E-mail: carlos.polanco@merck.es
Submitted on October 25, 2010; resubmitted on April 4, 2011; accepted on April 6, 2011
background: Despite many advances in assisted reproductive techniques (ART), little is known about preferences for technological
developments of women undergoing fertility treatments. The aims of this study were to investigate the preferences of infertile women undergoing
ART for controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) treatments; to determine the utility values ascribed to different attributes of COS treatments;
and to estimate women’s willingness to pay (WTP) for COS.
methods: A representative sample of ambulatory patients ready to receive, or receiving, COS therapies for infertility were recruited
from seven specialized private centres in six autonomous communities in Spain. Descriptive, inferential and conjoint analyses (CA) were
used to elicit preferences and WTP. Attributes and levels of COS treatments were identified by literature review and two focus groups
with experts and patients. WTP valuations were derived by a combination of double-bounded (closed-ended) and open questions and contingent
ranking methods.
results: In total, 160 patients [mean (standard deviation; SD) age: 35.8 (4.2) years] were interviewed. Over half of the participants
(55.0%) had a high level of education (university degree), most (78.8%) were married and half (50.0%) had an estimated net income of
.E1502 per month and had paid a mean (SD) E1194.17 (E778.29) for their most recent hormonal treatment. The most frequent
causes of infertility were related to sperm abnormalities (50.3%). In 30.6% of cases, there were two causes of infertility. The maximum
WTP for COS treatment was E800 (median) per cycle; 35.5% were willing to pay an additional E101–E300 for a 1–2% effectiveness
gain in the treatment. Utility values (CA) showed that effectiveness was the most valued attribute (39.82), followed by costs (18.74),
safety (17.75) and information sharing with physicians (14.93).
conclusions: WTP for COS therapies exceeds current cost. Additional WTP exists for 1–2% effectiveness improvement. Effectiveness
and costs were the most important determinants of preferences, followed by safety and information sharing with physicians.
Key words: hormone fertility treatments / preferences / willingness to pay / conjoint analysis / infertility

Se puede ver el artículo completo en:
Hum. Reprod. (2011) 26 (7): 1790-1798.

PONENCIA EN EL 13º CONGRESO MUNDIAL DE MENOPAUSIA

Donor selection and correlation with recipient results
Sánchez Fernando (ES) - GINEMED
Sánchez F, Sánchez P, Estévez M, Hebles M, Migueles B, Dorado M.

Oocyte donation is the only option for a menopausal woman who desires to get pregnant, regardless of ethical considerations, these cases are special so the way to proceed must be different, especially because we mustn’t transfer more than one embryo and we have to get pregnant quickly. Plus the normal way of donor selection (phenotypic, infectious, genetic, familiar…) we must take care of some other items like donor age or previous results. We did a retrospective analysis of 674 cycles of egg donation (2008-10), excluding the severe male factor. There are no differences in pregnancy rate (PR) when the donor is under 30. If we look at the results of the current cycle in the light of the previous one we found: first cycle, PR 56.7 %, n 180; pregnancy in a previous cycle, PR 63.9%, n 420; no pregnancy in previous cycle, PR 48.5%, n 74, p< 0,05. There are no differences when we evaluate the stimulation protocol, days, doses or drugs used. We found a statistical correlation between the number of donated MII eggs and the results (<8 eggs, n 246, PR 54.31; >8 eggs, n 428, PR 63.73, p <0,05) This difference is more important if we add the results of one frozen cycle in patients who didn’t get pregnant in the fresh transfer (< 8 eggs, PR 67.4 %; > 8 eggs, PR 84.6 %, p < 0.05). There are no differences in terms of PR regarding to the recipient's age, even over 50, or the cycle indication (premature menopause, natural menopause, premenopause, genetic, surgery, quimiotherapy, multiple failure in IVF cycles or others). Based on these results, for menopause women we strongly recommend the Single Embryo Transfer, if it’s possible in blastocyst stage, of an embryo which came form a probated young donor less than 30 years old who gives at least 8 MII, and vitrify the rest of the embryos for a second chance.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------