title: Is elective single embryo transfer a cost-effective alternative to double embryo transfer?
abstract: Elective single embryo transfer (eSET) is increasingly being considered as a means to reduce twin pregnancies associated with in vitro fertilisation treatment. However, it is important to consider the cost-effectiveness of alternative strategies when considering a change in policy. A review of the literature showed only five studies assessing both costs and consequences of strategies involving eSET compared with double embryo transfer. Several limitations in these studies prevent a definitive conclusion on the cost-effectiveness of eSET being reached. Future economic evaluations need to compare strategies relevant to routine practice, include all relevant costs, measure and value longer term outcomes appropriately, and assess the cost-effectiveness of eSET across different subgroups of women.
authors.affiliation: Health Economics Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, Scotland. g.scotland@abdn.ac.uk
authors.forename: G S
authors.initials: GS
authors.lastname: Scotland
authors.forename: P
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: McNamee
authors.forename: S
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Bhattacharya
mesh_terms: D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D004624:Embryo Transfer / Q000191:economics*; D019317:Evidence-Based Medicine; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans