Reproductive Tourism in Argentina: Clinic Accreditation and its Implications for Consumers, Health Professionals and Policy Makers

A subcategory of medical tourism, reproductive tourism has been the subject of much public and policy debate in recent years. Specific concerns include: the exploitation of individuals and communities, access to needed health care services, fair allocation of limited resources, and the quality and safety of services provided by private clinics. To date, the focus of attention has been on the thriving medical and reproductive tourism sectors in Asia and Eastern Europe; there has been much less consideration given to more recent ‘players’ in Latin America, notably fertility clinics in Chile, Brazil, Mexico and Argentina. In this paper, we examine the context-specific ethical and policy implications of private Argentinean fertility clinics that market reproductive services via the internet. Whether or not one agrees that reproductive services should be made available as consumer goods, the fact is that they are provided as such by private clinics around the world. We argue that basic national regulatory mechanisms are required in countries such as Argentina that are marketing fertility services to local and international publics. Specifically, regular oversight of all fertility clinics is essential to ensure that consumer information is accurate and that marketed services are safe and effective. It is in the best interests of consumers, health professionals and policy makers that the reproductive tourism industry adopts safe and responsible medical practices.

Health professionals’ and patients’ perspectives on pelvic floor muscle training adherence : 2011 ICS State-of-the-Science Seminar research paper IV of IV

Aims There is scant information on pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) adherence barriers and facilitators. A web-based survey was conducted (1) to investigate whether responses from health professionals and the public broadly reflected findings in the literature, (2) if responses differed between the two groups, and (3) to identify new research directions. Methods Health professional and public surveys were posted on the ICS website. PFMT adherence barriers and facilitators were divided into four categories: physical/condition, patient, therapy, and social-economic. Responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics from quantitative data and thematic data analysis for qualitative data. Results Five hundred and fifteen health professionals and 51 public respondents participated. Both cohorts felt “patient-related factors” constituted the most important adherence barrier, but differed in their rankings of short- and long-term barriers. Health professionals rated “patient-related” and the public “therapy-related” factors as the most important adherence facilitator. Both ranked “perception of PFMT benefit” as the most important long-term facilitator. Contrary to published findings, symptom severity was not ranked highly. Neither cohort felt the barriers nor facilitators differed according to PFM condition (urinary/faecal incontinence, pelvic organ prolapse, pelvic pain); however, a large number of health professionals felt differences existed across age, gender, and ethnicity. Half of respondents in both cohorts felt research barriers and facilitators differed from those in clinical practice. Conclusions An emphasis on “patient-related” factors, ahead of “condition-specific” and “therapy-related,” affecting PFMT adherence barriers was evident. Health professionals need to be aware of the importance of long-term patient perception of PFMT benefits and consider enabling strategies.