Skip to main content

Table 3 Comparison of business service volumes of various ART and sperm banks in China from January to April in 2019 and 2020

From: Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on Chinese assisted reproductive technology institutions and human sperm banks: reflections in the post-pandemic era

 

Total services Jan.–Apr

Recovery ratio (%)

2020

2019

Jan.–Apr

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

ART service volumes

 Outpatients

4,952,295

9,009,000

55.0

69.7

27.8

48.7

65.1

 AIH

21,229

39,711

53.5

68.9

19.3

41.8

67.0

 AID

3,899

8,258

47.2

59.2

16.1

37.1

61.2

 Aspiration cycles

86,397

170,161

50.8

65.3

45.8

32.5

57.7

 Fresh embryo transfer cycles

31,866

66,745

47.7

65.3

42.2

29.8

50.8

 Frozen embryo transfer cycles

90,550

143,854

62.9

75.3

44.7

41.4

82.6

Average

864,372.7

1,572,954.8

52.9

67.3

32.7

38.6

64.1

Sperm banks service volumes

 Sperm donors

2,967

7,544

39.3

53.0

2.2

14.6

71.5

 Tubes of qualified semen

8,741

33,409

26.2

52.5

1.5

7.5

31.0

 Tubes of external donor semen

7,219

18,107

39.9

62.4

6.3

15.5

65.5

 Self-sperm preservation

911

1,864

48.9

64.6

11.8

38.6

74.5

 Tubes of self-sperm preservation

2,992

6,410

46.7

61.5

13.5

37.6

66.5

Average

4,566.0

13,466.8

40.2

58.8

7.1

22.8

61.8

  1. The ratio is indicated in italics
  2. Status of institutional responses: among all surveyed institutions, there were 475 ART centers (91.9%) and 22 sperm banks (81.5%) that completed the online questionnaire