Banner
    IVF Overkill - The Right Timing May Be Better For Infertile Couples
    By News Staff | November 3rd 2011 01:46 PM | 5 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments

    In-vitro fertilisation (IVF) has helped numerous couples have children who otherwise would not have been able to, but a British study of a non-invasive, drug-free alternative to IVF could save them (and the taxpayers who fund the NHS) a lot of money.

    A new study (European Obstetrics&Gynaecology, 2011;6(2):92-4) shows that the DuoFertility monitor and service used for six months gives the same chance of pregnancy as a cycle of in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) for many infertile couples.

    DuoFertility is an ovulation pattern temperature monitor from Cambridge Temperature Concepts Ltd that uses body basal temperature.  When a woman ovulates, her body temperature rises slightly as the ruptured follicle that has released the egg secretes a hormone called progesterone. 

    When the time is optimal to conceive they, ummm, have sex.

    The study followed the first 500 couples using DuoFertility from launch in 2009, including 242 who qualified for IVF/ICSI treatment, 90 of whom who had previously had the procedure. The one-year clinical pregnancy rate using DuoFertility for those who qualified for IVF was 39%, which is higher than either the UK or EU clinical pregnancy rates for a cycle of IVF (26% and 28% respectively), whilst the corresponding one-year DuoFertility pregnancy rate for those who had already been through a cycle of IVF/ICSI was 28%.

    Some intangible benefit may be psychological.  If a woman regards IVF as invasive or a man finds it demeaning, this may help, though those instances are obviously rare. More practically, a typical cycle of IVF costs the NHS around £4,500 including drugs and consultancy, while the cost outside NHS (because of their limitations on who can get it through NHS, these account for 80% of IVF procedures performed in the UK) is around £7,000.

    The DuoFertility program costs £495 for a year and the company offers to refund those couples who have not achieved pregnancy after a year of using DuoFertility as directed.

    The study authors caution that although non-invasive and drug-free, DuoFertility is not suitable for all couples.   Dr. Shamus Husheer, inventor of DuoFertility, says, "although DuoFertility is suitable for around 80% of infertile couples, there are some couples with medically identified conditions that prevent natural conception, such as a woman with two blocked fallopian tubes. In these cases IVF is absolutely the right thing to do, enabling conception where it was previously a physical impossibility."

    Comments

    Bonny Bonobo alias Brat
    A new study (European Obstetrics&Gynaecology, 2011;6(2):92-4) shows that the DuoFertility monitor and service used for six months gives the same chance of pregnancy as a cycle of in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) for many infertile couples.
    Sorry, this can't be possible for all infertile couples, it doesn't matter how much you monitor ovulation if the cause of a couple's infertility is a male infertility and/or sperm problem, as is the case for 50% of the couples seeking IVF treatment. IVF is definitely not 'overkill' for these couples.
    Make love not war
    Indeed: this seems little more than a technological version of timing ovulations, which practically every infertile couple will already have been doing without success.

    Hank
    It is just better timing.

    In the 1970s, some mechanics still tuned the engine of a car by ear.  Yet timing lights worked a lot better.  It's certainly valid to say plenty of mechanics fixed cars using their ears yet a lot more got fixed due to better technology. As this study showed, a method that works better and is much cheaper for couples who have already qualified for IVF because they could not get pregnant doing their own timing makes some sense.
    Want more no-nonsense, independent science? Buy Science Left Behind
    Bonny Bonobo alias Brat
    As this study showed, a method that works better and is much cheaper for couples who have already qualified for IVF because they could not get pregnant doing their own timing makes some sense.
    Yes, as long as the cause of the infertility has something to do with ovulation timing, if on the other hand the infertility is due to a serious sperm problem, then this would be just a waste of time for most of these couples. The sperm test is the easiest fertility test to do and is usually the first test done when a couple goes to a doctor to report a failure to get pregnant, after trying for some time.

    Make love not war
    Yes of course, because infertile couples aren't really infertile, they are just stupid and don't know when to have sex.
    Where do I start with picking this 'study' apart!!??
    1. Without controlling for the cause of infertility, this study means almost nothing.
    2. There was no control group (who did timed intercourse without the device) - so its unknown whether those couples would have fallen pregnant anyway.
    3. Length of infertility is a strong predictor of procedure success - controlling for the length of infertility and number of previous infertility treatments is essential in making any statements about the success or otherwise of the device.
    4. Age is the most predictive factor of success in infertility. No discussion of the impact of age makes this study meaningless.
    Sorry, I will be going back to the IVF clinic long before I'd waste another 12 months on one of these devices.