Clinics are warned to be more open about IVF extras

CLINICS OFFERING fertility treatment must be more transparent about the effectiveness and costs of “optional extras”, the UK’s fertility regulator has said.

Practitioners must adopt a “culture change” if the add-ons, which are increasing in popularity, are to be offered responsibly, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) said.

The watchdog said there was “no conclusive evidence” that any of the add-ons offered with fertility treatment increase the chance of a pregnancy or live birth.

A consensus statement signed by 11 fertility bodies, including the HFEA, said a failure to provide evidence-based treatment poses a “significant risk” to patient trust.

It said: “Practitioners have a duty of care to patients which should separate pressure from patients and commercial interests from their best practice advice.

“We believe that culture change is required if the potential benefits of new treatments are to be offered responsibly.”

According to HFEA’s most recent national fertility patient survey, around three-quarters of patients who received treatment over the last two years had at least one type of add-on.

It said the most common treatments include an endometrial scratch and embryo glue, which may increase the chances of an embryo implanting, and an embryoscope, which monitors cell division.

Its website rates 11 add-ons using a traffic light system, with green meaning at least one goodquality, randomised clinical trial has shown the treatment to be effective and safe.

None of the 11 treatments have received a green rating.

Bronagh Scott, director of nursing, policy and practice at the Royal College of Nursing, said: “Some people who require treatment to help them to have a healthy baby can become desperate and will try a wide range of treatments, not all of which are based on sound evidence.

“This document will empower nurses to contribute to changing the culture around fertility treatment add-ons and ensure any innovations in the field are responsible and ethical.”

The sector was also branded an “intensely competitive market”, with patients developing strong views due to information online.