No abstract

BackgroundDue to extensive literature in the field of lung cancer and their heterogeneous results, the aim of this study was to systematically review of systematic reviews studies which reviewed the cost-effectiveness of various lung cancer screening and treatment methods.MethodsIn this systematic review of systematic reviews study, required data were collected searching the following key words which selected from Mesh: “lung cancer”, “lung oncology”, “lung Carcinoma”, “lung neoplasm”, “lung tumors”, “cost- effectiveness”, “systematic review” and “Meta-analysis”. The following databases were searched: PubMed, Cochrane Library electronic databases, Google Scholar, and Scopus. Two reviewers (RA and A-AS) evaluated the articles according to the checklist of “assessment of multiple systematic reviews” (AMSTAR) tool.ResultsOverall, information of 110 papers was discussed in eight systematic reviews. Authors focused on cost-effectiveness of lung cancer treatments in five systematic reviews. Targeted therapy options (bevacizumab, Erlotinib and Crizotinib) show an acceptable cost-effectiveness. Results of three studies failed to show cost-effectiveness of screening methods. None of the studies had used the meta-analysis method. The Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) tool and Drummond checklist were mostly used in assessing the quality of articles. Most perspective was related to the Payer (64 times) and the lowest was related to Social (11times). Most cases referred to Incremental analysis (82%) and also the lowest point of referral was related to Discounting (in 49% of the cases). The average quality score of included studies was calculated 9.2% from 11.ConclusionsTargeted therapy can be an option for the treatment of lung cancer. Evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of computerized tomographic colonography (CTC) in lung cancer screening is recommended. The perspective of the community should be more taken into consideration in studies of cost-effectiveness. Paying more attention to the topic of Discounting will be necessary in the studies.

Background:Drug costs in Iran accounts for about 30% of the total health care expenditure. Moreover, pharmaceutical business lies among the world’s greatest businesses. The aim of this study was to analyze Iran’s comparative advantage and intra-industry trade in pharmaceuticals so that suitable policies can be developed and implemented in order to boost Iran’s trade in this field.Methods:To identify Iran’s comparative advantage in pharmaceuticals, trade specialization, export propensity, import penetration and Balassa and Vollrath indexes were calculated and the results were compared with other pharmaceutical exporting countries. The extent and growth of Iran’s intra-industry trade in pharmaceuticals were measured and evaluated using the Grubel-Lloyd and Menon-Dixon indexes. The required data was obtained from Iran’s Customs Administration, Iran’s pharmaceutical Statistics, World Bank and International Trade Center.Results:The results showed that among pharmaceutical exporting countries, Iran has a high level of comparative disadvantage in pharmaceutical products because it holds a small share in world’s total pharmaceutical exports. Also, the low extent of bilateral intra-industry trade between Iran and its trading partners in pharmaceuticals shows the trading model of Iran’s pharmaceutical industry is mostly inter-industry trade rather than intra-industry trade. In addition, the growth of Iran’s intra-industry trade in pharmaceuticals is due to its shares of imports from pharmaceutical exporting countries to Iran and exports from Iran to its neighboring countries.Conclusions:The results of the analysis can play a valuable role in helping pharmaceutical companies and policy makers to boost pharmaceutical trade.

BackgroundPoor quality of life is common among diabetic patients, and educational intervention is one of the most effective strategies to improve the quality of life for chronic patients.ObjectivesTo determine the effect of an educational intervention based on PRECEDE-PROCEED in quality of life of diabetic patients, in 2016.MethodsIn this quasi-experimental study, 86 patients referred to diabetic centers of Ardabil participated. We used the components PRECEDE-PROCEED model for planning, implementation and evaluation of the program. Data collection tools were Diabetes Quality of Life questionnaire (DQOL) and a researcher-made questionnaire. Eight training sessions were conducted for the intervention group for self-efficiency, self- management, attitude, knowledge, and enabling reinforcing factors. Quality of life was followed one and three months after intervention. Data were analyzed through SPSS 16 software using descriptive and analytical tests.ResultsThe mean age of patients was 55.88 (±12.1) years. The result showed that before intervention, no significant difference was observed among the mean scores of quality of life, self-management, knowledge, attitude, enabling and reinforcing factors, and self-efficiency in two groups. But one and three months after intervention a significant difference was observed (p<0.001).ConclusionEducational intervention with PRECEDE-PROCEED model improved the diabetic patient’s quality of life.

This article reports on a comparative study of the national notifiable infectious diseases surveillance systems currently employed in the United States of America, Australia and the Islamic Republic of Iran, with the aim of developing a modified system specific to the needs of the Iranian health system. Features of the surveillance systems examined in each country included: official data gathering structures; types of data collected; case definition and classification criteria; data collection processes; data analysis methods; disease classification systems; data dissemination and distribution methods; data quality control; and confidentiality procedures and guidelines. After consolidating the data, a model for an Iranian notifiable infectious diseases surveillance system was developed and was tested by the Delphi method in 3 stages. Proposition en vue de la modernisation du système iranien de surveillance des maladies infectieuses à déclaration obligatoire : comparaison avec les États-Unis et l'Australie RÉSUMÉ Cet article présente une étude comparative portant sur les systèmes nationaux de surveillance des maladies infectieuses à déclaration obligatoire actuellement en place aux États-Unis, en Australie et en République islamique d'Iran. Son objectif est de réformer le système pour l'adapter aux besoins du système de santé iranien. Les caractéristiques des systèmes de surveillance étudiés dans chaque pays comprenaient : les structures de collecte de données officielles, les types de données recueillies, la définition de cas et les critères de classification, les procédés de collecte des données, les méthodes d'analyse des données, les systèmes de classification des maladies, les méthodes de diffusion et de distribution des données, le contrôle de la qualité des données et les procédures et directives relatives à la confidentialité. Après regroupement des données, un modèle de système iranien de surveillance des maladies infectieuses à déclaration obligatoire a été mis au point et testé selon la méthode Delphi en 3 étapes.