Premium
Response to: Yazdani A. Surgery or in vitro fertilisation: The simplicity of this question belies its complexity. When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail
Author(s) -
Abbott Jason
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
australian and new zealand journal of obstetrics and gynaecology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.734
H-Index - 65
eISSN - 1479-828X
pISSN - 0004-8666
DOI - 10.1111/ajo.12769
Subject(s) - subspecialty , medicine , fertility , simplicity , quality (philosophy) , in vitro fertilisation , gynecology , family medicine , pregnancy , population , philosophy , environmental health , epistemology , biology , genetics
This is perhaps the most apt mantra of IVF ( in vitro fertilisation) as a treatment in Australasia in this day and age. It is also important to note the truth in the identification of IVF being low skill‐based, largely independent of the practitioner,[1][Yazdani A, 2017] but more importantly costly, and with few exceptions, only available in the private sector. Such revelations really require a rethink of the entire reproductive endocrinology and infertility ( CREI ) subspecialty. In fact, if there is only one solution to all fertility problems – that of the ‘effective IVF procedure’ – why not do away completely with the clinician and simply have nurse practitioners who oversee the identified issue of an individual or couple wanting a pregnancy? This in conjunction with the outstanding scientific advances that led to the initiation and promulgation of IVF really would reduce costs by cutting out the unnecessary clinician middle‐person who is unimportant in the equation.[1][Yazdani A, 2017] It may be that such cost reduction, the disbandment of the irrelevant subspecialty and protocol‐driven, high‐quality fertility checklists would allow this to be a publically accessible service for all, not just those who can afford it.