• About Us
  • Blogs & Vlogs
  • Newsletters
  • The Purple Tent
  • Contact Us
  • Log In/Register
  • Patrons
Global Women Connected
  • Women’s Health
    • Puberty
    • Menstrual Cycle
    • Female Disorders
      • Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome (PCOS)
      • Endometriosis
      • Pelvic Inflammatory Disease (PID)
      • Pelvic organ prolapse
      • Fibroids
      • Ovarian Cysts
      • Urinary Incontinence
    • Cancer
      • Symptoms
      • Preventation
      • Breast
      • Cervical
      • Ovarian
    • Menopause
  • Sex
    • Sex introduction
      • Sex Education Guide For Parents
      • Masturbation & Orgasms
      • Sex During & After Pregnancy
      • Sex In Older Age
      • Porn
    • Contraception
      • Condoms
      • Pill
      • Implant/injection
      • Patch/ring
      • IUD
      • Diaphragm/cap
      • Permanent
      • Natural
      • Emergency
      • Young adults
      • 40s and 50s
    • Sexually Transmitted Diseases
  • Pregnancy
    • Preconception Care
    • Tests During Pregnancy
    • Birth
    • Teenage Pregnancy
    • Ectopic Pregnancy
    • Miscarriages
    • Termination Of Pregnancy
    • Maternal Mortality
    • Cancer During Pregnancy
    • Value Of Female Children
  • Wellbeing
    • Energy Management
    • Exercise
    • Sleep
    • Burnout
    • Body Image
    • Eating Disorders
    • Plastic / Cosmetic Surgery

Is it fair to offer these to patients?

IVF add-ons are commonplace but have little evidence of increasing live birth rates

Author: Professor Joyce Harper

3 years ago 0
Share this:

For over a decade I have becoming increasingly upset by the growing number of new treatments being marketed towards patients going through IVF, that have little or no evidence of increasing the chances of IVF success. The use of these IVF add-ons has now become a booming business but it is one of the most controversial aspects of fertility treatment. I am asked to debate this topic regularly – most recently last week at the CoGEN conference in Paris and next week at the COGI conference, also in Paris. The title of the debate next week is: Standard IVF vs Add-on IVF – What if the patient is willing to pay for add-ons? I will be debating against Simon Fishel.

I spent over 5 years going through IVF. I know the pain and torture of this journey. I sought out any treatment that might increase my chances of getting pregnant. Even I tried acupuncture and reflexology. 20 years ago very few studies had been done to show the effect of these treatments one way or another. I was desperate  – I thought I might as well give it a go.

I am now much more informed about the use of these add-ons and I am part of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) committee that has produced a patient web site on IVF add-ons which summarises the studies that have been done. The HFEA web site uses a traffic light system, where green means there is more than one good quality randomised controlled trial which shows that the procedure is effective and safe, amber means there is a small or conflicting body of evidence, which means further research is still required and the technique cannot be recommended for routine use and red means there is no evidence to show that it is effective and safe. At our last HFEA meeting we have made many recommendations to update the web site, including providing more information for patients so that they can follow the studies that have been done and make a more informed choice.

I was one of the authors of a consensus statement which gives recommendations about the use of IVF add-ons: The responsible use of treatment add-ons in fertility services: a consensus statement. We concluded: “Combination of patient expectation, market forces and a recasting of the professional-patient relationship in an online information age appears to be driving the supply of, and demand for, treatment add-ons. Practitioners have a duty of care to patients, which should separate pressure from patients and commercial interests from their best practice advice. We believe that culture change is required, if the potential benefits of new treatments are to be offered responsibly. It’s time to have an open and honest conversation about treatment add-ons. This consensus statement sets out the principles of responsible innovation which
we believe should guide professionals in the UK.”

I have published three scientific papers on this topic and our most recent paper was published last week. Do à la carte menus serve infertility patients? The ethics and regulation of IVF add-ons concludes that “Because the effects of a treatment can’t be known until it has been robustly evaluated, we argue that strong evidence should be required before add-ons are introduced to the clinic. In the meantime, there is an imperative to identify methods for communicating the associated risks and uncertainties of add-ons to prospective patients.”

Last week I took part in a panel discussion on solo motherhood at the UK’s Fertility Show. It was the first time I had attended as I had been told that there were a lot off add-on treatments being marketed to patients. I took 20 of my Masters students. What did we find? Stands selling Diana Royal Jelly, that will apparently give you a 95% chance of getting pregnant, horoscopes, reflexology, Chinese medicine, vitamins, essential oils that will restore your cellular health and one company saying they have a method that will rejuvenate your ovaries or testicles!

Some argue that the patients should decide if they want to pay for these unproven treatments. But my argument is that many people going through IVF will try anything that has the slightest chance of increasing their success rates and so we have to ensure they have the correct information. If your doctors tells you that there is a slim chance this or that treatment will improve your chances – you may well do it, if you can afford it. But IVF add-ons can hugely increase the cost of fertility treatment. I have heard that many couples only tried once as they spent all their money on add-ons. My argument when I am debating is – what does the doctor tell their patient?  Do they say there is evidence that the add-on will increase their chance of having a baby, or that there is no conclusive evidence?

What do you think? Should patients be able to pay for any treatment if they wish? How much should doctors tell their patients about the evidence?

The image is from the HFEA add-on web site showing assisted hatching. It has been given a red traffic light but almost 30% of UK IVF clinics advertise this on their web site and charge up to £600.

2 2
Previous Post

Launch of a global fertility education poster campaign

Next Post

Global Fertility Education Campaign

Cancel Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Menopause and your menstrual cycle

3 years ago 0
From puberty to the menopause, most of our lives will be governed by our monthly cycles of periods, ovulation and often premenstrual tension. After the menopause we are free of our menstrual...

Female genital mutilation – more countries are...

4 years ago 0
FGM comprises all procedures that involve partial or complete removal of the external genitalia or other injury to the female genital organs for non medical reasons (WHO).  It is also...
  • Recent
  • Popular
  • Comments

Menopause and exercise

2 months ago 0

What is the purpose and meaning of your life?

4 months ago 0

We need to teach everyone about the menopause

5 months ago 0

UK Governments Women’s Health Strategy

5 months ago 0

What does the future hold for reproduction?

1 year ago 0

Do not believe everything you read

6 years ago 6

Sometimes I get lonely…

7 years ago 6

The Babypod

7 years ago 5

Dementia and Alzheimer’s

7 years ago 4

How many women breast feed?

6 years ago 4

Newsletter Sign-up

Twitter Feed

  • Listen to @timspector and Caroline Ovadia talk about how your #microbiome can affect your own health and your baby'… https://t.co/hmtdlxMpjh
    April 25th, 2018
  • Join @DrAndyChilds and @davide_danovi to talk about #eggs, #infertility and #stemcells at @pintofscience and be in… https://t.co/GoNIIc2EVz
    April 19th, 2018
  • RT @DrHelenONeill: More communication between clinicians and scientists is essential in this #genomic era. Thanks for the invite to be inte…
    March 15th, 2018

Instagram Feed

Load More…Follow on Instagram

Disclaimer

On all of our platforms, Global Women Connected does not provide professional medical advice. For any health issues, please contact your health care provider. All comments and discussions are provided by any person registered with Global Women Connected. Global Women Connected does not accept responsibility for any advice given and the advice given may not be the views of the staff of Global Women Connected.
© Copyright 2022. All rights reserved.