Emergency COS in oncofertility preservation

Abstract

influx of assisted reproductive technology (ART) and services promote price transparency, with detailed costs of services listed on websites. Given current market trends, we sought to determine how existing clinics perform in terms of price transparency and to what extent they provide information on available discounts and financial assistance.DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology (SART) registry clinics.MATERIALS AND METHODS: Clinics were identified through the SART website clinic search function on 4/14/19. Military clinics and those clinics without a website were excluded. Between 4/15/19 and 4/22/19, each clinic's website was queried. Practice location (city, state) and type (private vs. academic vs. other [e.g.: managed care]) were recorded. Prices for consultation, intrauterine insemination (IUI; including monitoring and sperm preparation), in vitro fertilization (IVF; excluding pre-implantation genetic testing), frozen embryo transfer (FET), and oocyte cryopreservation (OC) were recorded. Mean costs were calculated for each reported price.RESULTS: 382 clinics were listed on the SART website and 375 met study inclusion criteria. Table 1 illustrates the number and percentage of clinics that provided costs for services, information on discounts, and available financial assistance on their websites. Only 22.8% (67/293) of private practices and 11.7% (9/77) of academic practices reported the price of one or more services.