The new regulation for assisted reproductive techniques: Changing uro-andrology patient profile and impact on urological practice Yardimci üreme yöntemleri̇ne yöneli̇k yeni̇yönetmel̇ik sonrasi deǧi̇şen üro-androloji̇hasta profi̇li̇ve bunun kli̇ni̇ǧe yansimasi


Akbal C., TİNAY İ., Tavukçu H. H., TARCAN T., ŞİMŞEK F.

Turk Uroloji Dergisi, cilt.33, sa.2, ss.161-164, 2007 (Scopus, TRDizin) identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 33 Sayı: 2
  • Basım Tarihi: 2007
  • Dergi Adı: Turk Uroloji Dergisi
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Scopus, TR DİZİN (ULAKBİM)
  • Sayfa Sayıları: ss.161-164
  • Anahtar Kelimeler: Infertility, Male factor, Regulation
  • Marmara Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

Introduction: According to the new regulation in assisted reproductive techniques law in 2005, government employee must receive a health board statement from a teaching or university hospital proving the necessity of assisted reproductive techniques in order to get this service for free. In this study we aimed to evaluate the patient profile, who admitted to the Uro-Andrology clinic, before and after the new regulation and its impact on urologic practice. Materials and Methods: Fifty five male patients, who admitted between August 2001 and August 2004, and 42 male patients, who admitted between June 2006 and March 2007, with primary male infertility were compared in terms of age at the time of admission, marriage duration, duration of unprotected intercourse, accompanying female factor, previous urological operations and number of patients with azoospermia. Results: The mean marriage durations were 7.59 years before and 6.24 years after the new regulation but were statistically insignificant. Mean age at the time of admission was similar in both groups. Mean duration of unprotected intercourse were 7 years before and 5.21 years after the new regulation but the difference was statistically insignificant. After the new regulation the number of patients with azoospermia was significantly lower than the other group. Before 2005 patients with azoospermia accounted 72% of the group but this reduced to 23% after the new regulation. Conclusion: After the new regulation, the possibility to receive free service in an assisted reproductive techniques center and the necessity of urological evaluation will cause earlier referral to the urology clinics and increase in the number of patients with oligospermia. Therefore, there is need for studies in idiopathic oligospermia treatment, for detailed evaluation of the patients with a surgically corrected infertility, for an extra afford in andrological micro-surgical practice in urology resident education and CME courses in this field.