Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Male infertility.

Randall B Meacham1, Geoffrey F Joyce, Matthew Wise

  • 1Department of Urology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Denver, Colorado, USA.

The Journal of Urology
|May 19, 2007
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Re: Prewash Total Motile Count is a Poor Predictor of Live Birth in Intrauterine Insemination Cycles.

The Journal of urology·2019
Same author

Re: Inconsistent Adoption of World Health Organization V (2010) Semen Analysis Reference Ranges in the United States Eight Years after Publication.

The Journal of urology·2019
Same author

Re: Introduction: Male Fertility Testing: The Past, Present, and Future.

The Journal of urology·2019
Same author

Re: Evidence-Based Medicine when the Evidence is Poor.

The Journal of urology·2019
Same author

Re: Microsurgical Epididymal Cystectomy Does Not Impact upon Sperm Count, Motility or Morphology and is a Safe and Effective Treatment for Epididymal Cystic Lesions (ECLs) in Young Men with Fertility Requirements.

The Journal of urology·2019
Same author

Re: Home Sperm Testing Device versus Laboratory Sperm Quality Analyzer: Comparison of Motile Sperm Concentration.

The Journal of urology·2019
Same journal

Multi-institutional Assessment of Performance Metrics for MRI-targeted Transperineal Prostate Biopsy.

The Journal of urology·2026
Same journal

Urinary Supersaturation in a Randomized Trial among Individuals with Recurrent Nephrolithiasis comparing Empiric versus Selective Preventive Therapy: The URINE Trial.

The Journal of urology·2026
Same journal

The FDA Should Allow More BCG Strains into the US Market: How Recent Landmark Trials Expose a Regulatory Paradox.

The Journal of urology·2026
Same journal

Let's Shift the Focus from Death to Life after Fournier's Gangrene.

The Journal of urology·2026
Same journal

Endourology and Nephrolithiasis.

The Journal of urology·2026
Same journal

With great cost comes great responsibility: who will own the rising costs of bladder cancer care?

The Journal of urology·2026
See all related articles

Male infertility treatment costs are substantial, nearing $18 billion annually when including assisted reproduction. Addressing underlying causes is crucial due to the high expense of fertility treatments.

Area of Science:

  • Urology
  • Reproductive Medicine
  • Health Economics

Background:

  • Male infertility affects a significant portion of the population, necessitating a comprehensive understanding of healthcare resource utilization and economic impact.
  • Existing data on male infertility treatment costs may be incomplete due to non-traditional reimbursement patterns.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To assess trends in healthcare resource use for male infertility in the United States.
  • To estimate the economic burden associated with male infertility diagnosis and treatment.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of healthcare data, including inpatient hospitalizations and ambulatory surgery visits.
  • Estimation of treatment expenditures for primary male infertility and assisted reproduction technologies.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • Inpatient hospitalizations for male infertility are infrequent, with varicocele management being a primary reason for stays, often in rural settings.
  • Ambulatory surgery rates for male infertility were highest among men aged 25-34, with significant geographic and ethnic disparities observed.
  • Total expenditures for primary male infertility treatment were approximately $17 million in 2000, escalating to about $18 billion when including assisted reproduction technology (ART).

Conclusions:

  • Accurate cost assessment for male infertility care is challenging due to varied seeking patterns for treatment.
  • The high cost of ART necessitates a focus on addressing the root causes of male infertility.
  • Further research into the demographics and management strategies for male reproductive dysfunction is warranted.