Chapter 88: Cost-Effectiveness of NaProTECHNOLOGY

Thomas W Hilgers

Restorative Reproductive Medicine · Restorative Care and Assisted Reproduction

Chapter 88: Cost-Effectiveness of NaProTECHNOLOGY

Hilgers TW

The Medical and Surgical Practice of NaProTECHNOLOGY, 2004

RRM Academy Synopsis

A 2004 model puts NaProTECHNOLOGY below IVF in cost per pregnancy

A 2004 textbook cost model estimates that a successful pregnancy costs $30,609.38 to $38,644.82 with NaProTECHNOLOGY and $47,577.21 with IVF. The model runs among 100 infertility patients per approach. The chapter says the IVF figure leaves out finding and treating the cause.

Key Findings

The chapter estimates five-year costs of $494 for the Creighton Model System against $2,835 for tubal sterilization, $2,300 for a progesterone-releasing intrauterine device and $1,890 for the oral contraceptive.
For 100 women with premenstrual syndrome, yearly cost is estimated at $510,431.26 with standard care and $321,829.89 with NaProTECHNOLOGY.
Evaluation and surgery for 100 infertility patients cost an estimated $2,640,402 in NaProTECHNOLOGY and $1,561,352 in IVF. The chapter says the NaProTECHNOLOGY evaluation is more thorough.
Cost per successful pregnancy is estimated at $47,577.21 for IVF, and at $30,609.38 or $38,644.82 for the two NaProTECHNOLOGY treatment progressions.
Across the items analyzed, current approaches total $116,270.95 per person and NaProTECHNOLOGY $84,496.59, a saving of $31,774.36.

RRM Context

Restorative reproductive medicine asks why conception fails. IVF proceeds without answering that. The chapter says the same of its IVF group: the cause is unlikely to be found or treated. Health plan studies it cites put infertility coverage at $0.10 to $1.71 per member month, averaging $0.71.

Our editorial summary of this paper, not the article's abstract.

Abstract

An economic analysis of NaProTECHNOLOGY compares the total treatment costs and cost-per-live-birth outcomes against assisted reproductive technologies, including IVF, drawing on outcome data from the Pope Paul VI Institute to demonstrate that NaPro's higher per-cycle success rates yield a favorable cost-effectiveness ratio despite comparable or lower upfront expenditures. Because NaProTECHNOLOGY identifies and corrects underlying pathology rather than bypassing it, its resource utilization model supports long-term gynecological health benefits that IVF cannot provide, making the economic case inseparable from the clinical one.

Topics

Restorative Reproductive Medicine › Restorative Care and Assisted Reproduction › Cost and Access Comparisons · Cost and Access › Cost of Care › Cost Effectiveness · Assisted Reproduction › Industry, Cost and Access › Cost Effectiveness

Thomas W Hilgers

Tom Hilgers, T Hilgers

Hilgers et al. 2004, Hilgers 2004

Chapter 88: Cost-Effectiveness of NaProTECHNOLOGY

A 2004 model puts NaProTECHNOLOGY below IVF in cost per pregnancy

Key Findings

RRM Context

Abstract

Topics

By this author

Related research