In a few separate posts, I've talked about how my husband & I evaluated our IF treatment options by looking at how cost effective they were. I thought I'd start a separate thread to explain the math we used and share the data. Please note that all data is assuming normal tubes, no endo, no MFI, and 2+ years of TTC. Results:
Analysis of Results:
- Cost per % represents the amount of money paid for each percentage point of 'success.' Lower = more cost effective.
- Treatments in order of cost effectiveness
- Based on the above data - we decided that for us, IUI (with no medication), IUI (with injectables), and TI (with injectables) were not cost effective enough to pursue, when compared to the other available options.
- Cost - I used the following estimates. The order of magnitude of the cost is significant, the specific dollar amount is not. For example, it does not impact the relative effectiveness if oral meds cost $10 instead of $50, or if IUI costs $750 instead of $500.
- % Success - I took data from the below table (and extrapolated where necessary), assuming total motile sperm count over 20 million.
We're both engineers with MBAs - so we tend to make very data driven decisions. Although that works for us, it's definitely necessarily the best decision for everyone. So many other factors play a part in IF than just dollars and cents, do what's right for you!
Me (31) & DH (31) - married 2008; TTC since 2013
SA = normal; HSG = clear; history of DVT/PE
Diagnosed with unexplained infertility
IUI #1- April '16 - BFN
IUI #2 - May '16 - BFN
IVF Fresh Xfer #1 (1 blastocyst) - Sept '16 - BFN
FET #2 - 11/8/16 (2 blastocysts) - Beta on 11/18
4 more blastocysts on ice