RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Though insurance coverage is evolving for male infertility services, most patients continue to pay out of pocket. These costs such as semen analysis and intracytoplasmic sperm injection preparation may affect the utilization of those services. We sought to determine online price transparency specifically for male infertility services on the websites of in-vitro fertilization (IVF) clinics in the US. METHODS: In this cross-sectional analysis, pricing data was acquired from each clinic on the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology (SART) website as of July 2019. Each website was examined for availability and cost of services. Pricing data that required applying for a quote or a phone call was excluded. Mean price was calculated for each service. Additionally, practice location in an insurance coverage mandated state (ICMS) was also analyzed to evaluate for any effect on price transparency. RESULTS: Only 24.7% (89/361) of SART clinic websites included any pricing information. Of clinics with websites (361/383), 16.3% (59/361) had ≥2 prices reported and only 5.0% (18/361) had ≥6 prices reported. Only 3.6% (13/361) reported prices for male-related infertility services. Average semen analysis price was $161 of 10 reporting clinics. Four clinics reported sperm cryopreservation or annual sperm storage price, $388 and $555, respectively. Sperm retrieval cost $244 at the two reporting clinics. ICMS did not affect male price transparency, ICMS 3.1% (6/194) vs. non-ICMS 4.2% (7/167) (P=0.576). CONCLUSIONS: Price transparency of SART clinics on websites is relatively poor with only about one-quarter of clinics providing any cost information at all. Male infertility related pricing information is even more rarely reported compared to other IVF services potentially causing a stronger barrier for males to pursue infertility treatment.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether a financial incentive changed research patterns among residents over a 12-year period. METHODS: At our institution, beginning July 2016, any resident work that led to a PubMed citation was awarded $1,000. A review of the PubMed database and the regional meeting of the South Central Section of AUA (SCS/AUA) presentation itineraries were used to quantify and qualify the participation in research by these residents before and after introduction of the financial incentive. RESULTS: Scholarly activity from thirty out of thirty possible residents was evaluated. The monetary incentive resulted in increased production post-incentive (6.33) vs pre-incentive (2.44) in average total authorship participation published to PubMed per year (P = .0125). The average number of PubMed primary authorships per resident per year increased from 0 in July 2007-June 2008 to 0.7 in July 2018-June 2019, displaying upward trajectory. Average primary authorship of research produced per year presented at SCS/AUA and published to PubMed increased postincentive (9.00) vs pre-incentive (4.89) (Pâ¯=â¯.0479). More review articles and less basic science research were published after the incentive. CONCLUSION: Offering financial incentives to urology residents increased publications and meaningful participation in research.
