J Korean Med Sci.  2020 Oct;35(39):e341. 10.3346/jkms.2020.35.e341.

Socioeconomic Status and Successful Delivery after an Infertility Diagnosis: a Nationwide Health Insurance Cohort Study in Korea Conducted from 2005 to 2013

Affiliations
  • 1Department of Preventive Medicine, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Korea
  • 2Department of Policy Analysis and Management, College of Human Ecology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA
  • 3Department of Preventive Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
  • 4Institute of Health Service Research, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea
  • 5Department of Hospital Management, Graduate School of Public Health, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea
  • 6Department of Public Health Science, Graduate School, Korea University, Seoul, Korea

Abstract

Background
The global disease burden of infertility is rising and accessibility to infertility treatments and assisted reproduction is a challenging issue. Therefore, we investigated characteristics of successful delivery after an infertility diagnosis among infertile women.
Methods
We designed a retrospective cohort study with the main outcome measure of a delivery medical record after the initial diagnosis of infertility. A total of 10,108 women patients who were diagnosed with infertility between 2005 to 2013 in the National Health Insurance Cooperation Cohort Database of Korea were enrolled. The adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for subsequent delivery were estimated by applying a Cox proportional-hazard regression model.
Results
Approximately 55% of infertile women who reported infertility had a delivery eventually. Infertile women who are aged between 30 to 39 (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.75–0.84), in low income level (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.71–0.84), or diagnosed with diabetes (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.60–0.96) were less likely to report a delivery.
Conclusion
These findings highlight demographic, socioeconomic, and medical characteristics of reporting a consequent delivery. Although many previous articles reported an association between socioeconomic status and receiving medical evaluation, there were few studies regarding successful delivery after an infertility diagnosis across socioeconomic status. Thus, the maintaining of support for low socioeconomic status infertile women and their family should be considered after the infertility diagnosis in aspects of financial and social approaches.

Keyword

Infertility; Delivery; Socioeconomic Status; Cohort; Inequality; Korea

Figure

  • Fig. 1 Flowchart showing sample selection.KNHI = Korean National Health Insurance.

  • Fig. 2 Delivery rate after infertility diagnosis by tertile income group.

  • Fig. 3 Adjusted HRs among lowest tertile group compared to the highest one, by regions. Capital means Seoul, Metropolitans are large cities more than a million population including Busan, Daegu, Incheon, Daejeon, Gwangju and Ulsan, and Small cities or rural are the other provinces in Korea.HR = hazard ratio.*P < 0.05, **P < 0.001.


Cited by  1 articles

Socioeconomic Factors and Abortive Outcomes of Clinical Pregnancy After Embryo Transfer in the Setting of Universal Health Insurance Coverage of IVF
Jee Hyun Kim, Seyoung Kim, Ki-Jin Ryu, Hyuntae Park, Yong-Jin Kim, Seung-Ah Choe
J Korean Med Sci. 2023;38(38):e293.    doi: 10.3346/jkms.2023.38.e293.


Reference

1. Boivin J, Bunting L, Collins JA, Nygren KG. International estimates of infertility prevalence and treatment-seeking: potential need and demand for infertility medical care. Hum Reprod. 2007; 22(6):1506–1512. PMID: 17376819.
Article
2. Vayena E, Rowe PJ, Griffin PD. Current Practices and Controversies in Assisted Reproduction: Report of a WHO Meeting on “Medical, Ethical and Social Aspects of Assisted Reproduction”. Geneva: World Health Organization;2002.
3. Ombelet W, Cooke I, Dyer S, Serour G, Devroey P. Infertility and the provision of infertility medical services in developing countries. Hum Reprod Update. 2008; 14(6):605–621. PMID: 18820005.
Article
4. Cousineau TM, Domar AD. Psychological impact of infertility. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2007; 21(2):293–308. PMID: 17241818.
Article
5. OECD. Fertility rates. Total, children/woman, 1970–2017. Updated 2019. Accessed July 4, 2019. https://data.oecd.org/pop/fertility-rates.htm.
6. Eun KS. Lowest-low fertility in the Republic of Korea: causes, consequences and policy responses. Asia Pac Popul J. 2007; 22(2):51–72.
Article
7. Ma L. Female labour force participation and second birth rates in South Korea. J Popul Res (Canberra). 2016; 33(2):173–195.
Article
8. Hwang N, Lee S, Chang I. The Result and Assessment of Supporting Program for Parents Couples with Infertility in 2016. Sejong: Ministry of Health and Welfare, Korea Institute for Health and Social Affairs;2017.
9. Lee J, Lee JS, Park SH, Shin SA, Kim K. Cohort profile: the National Health Insurance Service-National Sample Cohort (NHIS-NSC), South Korea. Int J Epidemiol. 2017; 46(2):e15. PMID: 26822938.
Article
10. Shin YJ. Policy context of the poor progress of the pro-poor policy: a case study on the medical-aid policy during Kim Dae-jung's government (1998–2002) in the Republic of Korea. Health Policy. 2006; 78(2-3):209–223. PMID: 16289428.
Article
11. National Health Insurance Service. National Health Insurance Service Statistical Yearbook. Wonju: National Health Insurance Service;2012.
12. Howell EA, Zeitlin J, Hebert PL, Balbierz A, Egorova N. Association between hospital-level obstetric quality indicators and maternal and neonatal morbidity. JAMA. 2014; 312(15):1531–1541. PMID: 25321908.
Article
13. Farland LV, Collier AY, Correia KF, Grodstein F, Chavarro JE, Rich-Edwards J, et al. Who receives a medical evaluation for infertility in the United States? Fertil Steril. 2016; 105(5):1274–1280. PMID: 26785253.
Article
14. Eisenberg ML, Li S, Cullen MR, Baker LC. Increased risk of incident chronic medical conditions in infertile men: analysis of United States claims data. Fertil Steril. 2016; 105(3):629–636. PMID: 26674559.
Article
15. Kessler LM, Craig BM, Plosker SM, Reed DR, Quinn GP. Infertility evaluation and treatment among women in the United States. Fertil Steril. 2013; 100(4):1025–1032. PMID: 23849845.
Article
16. Morris M, Oakley L, Maconochie N, Doyle P. An investigation of social inequalities in help-seeking and use of health services for fertility problems in a population-based sample of UK women. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2011; 14(1):16–22. PMID: 21121703.
Article
17. Nahar P. The link between infertility and poverty: evidence from Bangladesh. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2012; 15(1):18–26. PMID: 22313219.
Article
18. Chambers GM, Hoang VP, Illingworth PJ. Socioeconomic disparities in access to ART treatment and the differential impact of a policy that increased consumer costs. Hum Reprod. 2013; 28(11):3111–3117. PMID: 23906901.
Article
19. Dhalwani NN, Fiaschi L, West J, Tata LJ. Occurrence of fertility problems presenting to primary care: population-level estimates of clinical burden and socioeconomic inequalities across the UK. Hum Reprod. 2013; 28(4):960–968. PMID: 23315065.
Article
20. Smith JF, Eisenberg ML, Glidden D, Millstein SG, Cedars M, Walsh TJ, et al. Socioeconomic disparities in the use and success of fertility treatments: analysis of data from a prospective cohort in the United States. Fertil Steril. 2011; 96(1):95–101. PMID: 21616487.
Article
21. Feldman E. Medical ethics the Japanese way. Hastings Cent Rep. 1985; 15(5):21–24. PMID: 4066301.
Article
22. Bos HMW, van Rooij FB. The influence of social and cultural factors on infertility and new reproductive technologies. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2007; 28(2):65–68. PMID: 17538813.
Article
23. Lee DT, Ngai IS, Ng MM, Lok IH, Yip AS, Chung TK. Antenatal taboos among Chinese women in Hong Kong. Midwifery. 2009; 25(2):104–113. PMID: 17408821.
Article
24. Inhorn MC. Making Muslim babies: IVF and gamete donation in Sunni versus Shi'a Islam. Cult Med Psychiatry. 2006; 30(4):427–450. PMID: 17051430.
Article
25. Donkor ES, Sandall J. The impact of perceived stigma and mediating social factors on infertility-related stress among women seeking infertility treatment in Southern Ghana. Soc Sci Med. 2007; 65(8):1683–1694. PMID: 17673344.
Article
26. Loke AY, Yu PL, Hayter M. Experiences of sub-fertility among Chinese couples in Hong Kong: a qualitative study. J Clin Nurs. 2012; 21(3-4):504–512. PMID: 21507092.
Article
27. de Kok BC, Widdicombe S. ‘I really tried’: management of normative issues in accounts of responses to infertility. Soc Sci Med. 2008; 67(7):1083–1093. PMID: 18599172.
28. Korean Statistical Information Service. Monthly income and percentage of households under deficit spending by quintile income group. Updated 2016. Accessed April 20, 2017. http://kosis.kr/statisticsList/statisticsList_01List.jsp?vwcd=MT_ZTITLE&parentId=C#SubCont.
29. Dyer SJ, Sherwood K, McIntyre D, Ataguba JE. Catastrophic payment for assisted reproduction techniques with conventional ovarian stimulation in the public health sector of South Africa: frequency and coping strategies. Hum Reprod. 2013; 28(10):2755–2764. PMID: 23878180.
Article
30. Xu K, Evans DB, Kawabata K, Zeramdini R, Klavus J, Murray CJ. Household catastrophic health expenditure: a multicountry analysis. Lancet. 2003; 362(9378):111–117. PMID: 12867110.
Article
31. Fiscella K, Franks P, Gold MR, Clancy CM. Inequality in quality: addressing socioeconomic, racial, and ethnic disparities in health care. JAMA. 2000; 283(19):2579–2584. PMID: 10815125.
32. Alter DA, Naylor CD, Austin P, Tu JV. Effects of socioeconomic status on access to invasive cardiac procedures and on mortality after acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 1999; 341(18):1359–1367. PMID: 10536129.
Article
33. Hwang N, Chae S, Chang I. The Result and Assessment of Supporting Program for Parents Couples with Infertility in 2014. Sejong: Ministry of Health and Welfare, Korea Institute for Health and Social Affairs;2015.
34. Del Boca D. The effect of child care and part time opportunities on participation and fertility decisions in Italy. J Popul Econ. 2002; 15(3):549–573.
Article
35. Hank K, Kreyenfeld M. A multilevel analysis of child care and women's fertility decisions in Western Germany. J Marriage Fam. 2003; 65(3):584–596.
Article
36. Brewster KL, Rindfuss RR. Fertility and women's employment in industrialized nations. Annu Rev Sociol. 2000; 26(1):271–296.
Article
37. Räisänen S, Randell K, Nielsen HS, Gissler M, Kramer MR, Klemetti R, et al. Socioeconomic status affects the prevalence, but not the perinatal outcomes, of in vitro fertilization pregnancies. Hum Reprod. 2013; 28(11):3118–3125. PMID: 23892321.
38. Korea Legislation Research Institute. Equal employment opportunity and work-family balance assistance act. Updated 2019. Accessed June 15, 2020. https://elaw.klri.re.kr/kor_service/lawView.do?hseq=51205&lang=ENG.
Full Text Links
  • JKMS
Actions
Cited
CITED
export Copy
Close
Share
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
Similar articles
Copyright © 2024 by Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors. All rights reserved.     E-mail: koreamed@kamje.or.kr