This site is intended for health professionals only
Wednesday 23 May 2012
Facebook Twiter Linkedin

IVF funding cut by 14% in a year

By Madlen Davies | 10 Jan 2012

Exclusive NHS managers have sharply cut the number of IVF cycles they are funding this financial year, as they opt to ration the treatment even in the face of steadily increasing demand, a Pulse investigation reveals.

The average number of IVF cycles funded per month by PCTs so far in 2011/12 is running 13.8% behind the average rate for the whole of last year, responses gathered from 29 trusts under the Freedom of Information Act reveal.

The number of cycles of IVF funded on the NHS fell from 92.3 per PCT in 2010/11 to 79.5 pro rata per PCT in 2011/12. It is possible the reduction over the entire financial year could end up being even more severe, as PCTs often tighten purse strings and ration more strictly as the end of the financial year approaches.

The findings come despite rising demand for treatment. Figures from the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority show the number of cycles of IVF or ICSI fertility treatment provided rose by 30% between 2006 and 2010, but only a minority of these were provided by the NHS, with 60% funded by patients.

Dr Richard Vautrey, GPC deputy chair, warned availability of IVF on the NHS was likely to continue to fall: ‘There continues to be a demand for IVF from couples but there's a mismatch between patients' expectations and resources available.'

NHS Warrington has only funded seven requests for IVF in the first six months of 2011/12 compared with 79 last year. Last August it controversially decided to withdraw funding for IVF except in exceptional cases. A review last July decided the no-funding policy should remain in place for another 12 months.

Dr Andrew Davies, chair of Warrington Health Consortium and a GP in Warrington, said: ‘While we fully understand infertility is a condition which causes great distress to couples it does not affect general physical health or life expectancy.'

Other PCTs have reduced spending while denying they have changed eligibility criteria. NHS Stoke-on-Trent funded 27 requests in the first nine months of the year compared with 80 in 2010/11. A spokesperson said: ‘There is no specific reason why there appear to be less referrals - in the last month the figures have increased.'

Dr Sarah Jarvis, a GP in Hammersmith, west London, and former RCGP spokesperson on women's health, said: ‘GPs now have to adhere to strict policies whereas they might have allowed a certain amount of leeway in the past. The issue is funding, but even if we come out of recession I imagine people will consider therapeutics for diseases such as cancer more important than IVF.'

READERS' COMMENTS

Susan Seenan, Other healthcare professional,
11 Jan 2012
The NICE Guideline recommends that eligible couples receive up to three cycles of treatment and the real issue for patients, apart from the fact that many PCTs don't follow the guideline, is the unfairness of access to treatment. Patients in some areas can access two or three cycles, whllst others receive no funding or face such restrictive social criteria it effictively denies them access to any treatment and this is totally unfair. Access to any treatment for a medical condition (and infertility is designated as a medical condition) should not depend on your postcode and Infertility Network UK, working with the National Infertility Awareness Campaign, is working on behalf of patients to try to eradicate this unfair postcode lottery. The charity is extremely concerned that if commissioning for fertility treatment is passed to GPs,the situation will become even more unfair and is lobbying for fertility treatment to come under specialist commissioning. If you can help support this on behalf of your patients please do get in touch with us
Average (0Votes)
Top
Andrew Sikorski, GP Partner,
11 Jan 2012
Is there any worthwhile debate to be had concerning matching up the infertile with the excessively fertile and, with nature's energy, matching up unwanted children with frustrated proto- parents -in one fell swoop doing away with the high emotional and financial costs of both IVF ( with it's inherent failure rates ) and the 100's of thousands of abortion procedures performed annually? Or is individual choice and clinical cost just too sacrosanct?
Average (0Votes)
Top

ADD YOUR COMMENTS

Please note You must be a registered user of PulseToday and logged in to add comments. Opinions expressed below are those of the writers and do not necessarily reflect those of PulseToday. Comments are considered in the public domain and may be used in future Pulse coverage. We accept no responsibility, legal or otherwise, for the accuracy or the content of member comments.

Comment*

You must be logged in to add a comment.Clickhere to login.

SIGN UP FOR EMAIL NEWSLETTERS

Keep up-to-date with the latest changes to the NHS, CPD and clinical guidelines. Sign up below or find out more.

POLL

Is self-care the answer to the NHS efficiency drive? Read the full story here