Natural fertility treatment is more effective than in-vitro fertilisation (IVF), according to new research by the University of Utah in America.

It found that one in four of the 1,100 couples treated with natural methods in a clinic in Galway had successful pregnancies using natural procreative technology treatment (NPT). This compares with the most recent European success rates of 18.4% for IVF.

The research, published last week in the Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine, has been disputed by Tony Walsh, director of the Sims Fertility Clinic in Dundrum, Dublin. He claimed the study was not scientifically sound and did not constitute proof that NPT gives comparable live birthrates to IVF. The clinic has sent a letter to the journal outlining its argument.

But the study is being hailed as a landmark paper by supporters of NPT, as it is the first research into the effectiveness of the method to be published in a peerreviewed medical journal. It also found that the number of multiple births resulting from NPT was significantly lower than using artificial methods, with only 4.6% of women becoming pregnant with more than one child.

This compares with multiple birth rates of 34% recorded in a recent American study of couples undergoing assisted reproductive technology (ART).

Joseph Stanford from the University of Utah in Salt Lake City, the main author, said that he hoped the research would help overcome the “current information deficit” surrounding NPT.

“Many GPs and obstetricians are not aware of NPT because of a lack of published studies,” he said. “Now physicians can inform themselves of this treatment approach and hopefully recommend it to their patients.”

This sentiment was echoed by Phil Boyle, who carried out the research at the Galway clinic. “We opened 10 years ago, and I’ve had a waiting list since day one,” he said. “But that is primarily because of word of mouth. We don’t get many referrals from GPs or obstetricians because, for the most part, they don’t know enough about the procedures we carry out.”

“For some couples, IVF does not work and NPT does,” Boyle said. “Over the years we have successfully treated 140 couples who tried IVF and failed.”

Boyle said that while he didn’t wish to present NPT as a “budget fertility service” the process was also far cheaper than IVF. “On average, a couple will pay €1,000 for the whole course of treatment, in comparison to about €4,000 for IVF. While money is not the issue for a lot of couples, I think it is still relevant. Basically, I believe if there is a simpler way for people to conceive, they will take that option if they know about it.”

Walsh disagreed: “It’s like comparing apples to oranges,” he said. “The study isn’t broken down into diagnoses, it’s not broken down by age, there just isn’t enough patient analysis to make any valid statements. It’s also set over a 24-month period whereas IVF percentages are based on a monthly basis. You simply cannot compare that sort of data.”

The new research is also likely to attract interest from the Catholic church, which is a strong supporter of natural fertility methods.

Times Recommends

• Both sides blame US for worsening relations
• Stieg Larsson: losing the plot over his cash
• Odd creature paralysed by incompatible parts