ESHRE certification of ART centres for good laboratory and clinical practice
Authors: Gianaroli Luca , Veiga Anna , Gordts Stephan , Ebner Thomas , Woodward Bryan , Plas Catherine , van Groesen Wil , Sgargi Serena , Kovačič Borut 
Published: September 2022

STUDY QUESTION

Three years after the start of the ESHRE ART Centre Certification (ARTCC) programme, what is the current state of the system, in terms of the interest expressed in it and experiences during the assessment of ART services?

SUMMARY ANSWER

As of 1 December 2021, 25 European ART centres have been involved in the various stages of certification and the most common recommendations from inspectors were the need for documented training, verification of competencies for all staff members, verification of laboratory and clinical performance indicators, implementation of a quality management system and avoidance of overusing ICSI and add-ons.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

European Union (EU) legislation has included ART activities in the EU Tissue and Cells Directives (EUTCDs). Following inspections by national EUTCD authorities, many details regarding documentation, laboratory environment, handling of reproductive cells and tissues, traceability, coding and patient testing have become standardized. However, the EUTCDs do not cover all ART-specific aspects. For this reason, the ARTCC was established to focus on peculiar areas, including relevant staff qualifications, training, continuing professional development, workload, equipment suitability, (non)-evidence-based laboratory and clinical methods used, treatment approaches according to ESHRE guidelines, recommendations and laboratory and clinical key performance indicators.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

The article reviews the state-of-the-art of the ESHRE certification of ART centres for good clinical and laboratory practice over an initial 3-year period of operation, including the number of ART centres involved in the different stages of certification and the most common recommendations by inspectors.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

In 2016, the ARTCC working group began to establish a new ESHRE ARTCC programme. Since then, the working group has organized 4 preparatory courses and appointed 37 inspectors (19 clinicians, 17 embryologists and one paramedical). A tool to verify compliance with ESHRE recommendations for good laboratory and clinical practice was developed. The ARTCC has been open for applications since September 2018. In Step 1, the applicant enters basic information about the ART centre, staff and ART activities into the application platform. After review and approval, the applicant is given the opportunity to enter Step 2 and provide detailed online checklists on general, laboratory, clinical services and clinical outcomes. Two inspectors (one clinician and one embryologist) independently evaluate the submitted checklists. The condition to proceed to evaluation is a positive mean score (at least 66%) from each of the four checklists. In Step 3, a live site visit (or virtual owing to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic) is organized and the inspectors prepare a final report with appropriate recommendations. The application may be rejected at any time if the criteria required to advance to the next stage are not met. The ARTCC programme is currently available for European countries listed in ESHRE internal rules, available on the ESHRE website. The certificate is valid for 3 years, after which an application for renewal can be submitted.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Over a 3-year period (until 1 December 2021), 63 ART centres from 25 countries started applying through an online platform. So far, 38 applications did not progress owing to lack of completion of the initial application within a 1-year period or because applications came from non-European countries. Of the remaining 25 applications, 8 centres have been inspected and 7 centres have been certified. The most common recommendations given by inspectors to assessed centres were the need for documented training, verification of competencies, skills and continuing professional development for all staff members, verification of laboratory and clinical performance indicators and implementation of a quality management system. The inspectors identified some recurring areas of medically assisted reproduction that deviate from good practice: the overuse of ICSI, preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies, freeze-all and other add-ons. They often reported that the clinical outcomes could not be objectively assessed because of non-inclusion of the started cycles or the frequent use of freeze-all cycles.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

No major modifications have been made to the application platform and checklists since the early stages of the certification programme. However, in this short time, quite a few changes in clinical practice have occurred, especially concerning the more frequent use of the ‘freeze-all’ strategy. As a result, problems arose in the evaluation of clinical outcomes. In addition, because of the COVID-19 pandemic, site visits were substituted by the implementation of virtual visits. While this enabled the certification programme to continue, it is possible that certain critical details that would have been noticed during a traditional site visit may have been overlooked.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Regular monitoring of the observations of ARTCC inspectors and analysis of their reports is certainly useful to harmonize inspectors’ criteria in the assessment process and to identify chronic deficiencies in clinical and laboratory practice. Non-conformities can be addressed by ESHRE through guidelines and recommendations, as well as through discussion with EU institutions and competent authorities.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

The ARTCC programme was developed and funded by ESHRE, covering expenses associated with the meetings. The Steering Committee members who are the authors of this article did not receive payments for the completion of this study. The inspectors were remunerated for their work with an honorarium. The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.