Systematic rewiev of cost effectiveness studies for ten disease groups

There are approximately 20,000 journals and annualy 2 million articles printedaround the world. Research results sometimes support each other and sometimes not. Forthis reason an intervention leaning against only one research can be dangerous.Consequently, one should evaluate research results carefully before clinic interventions.It?s possible with systematic review to reach the best evidence, that is the basis ofevidence based intervention process. In this thesis, the methodology is systematic reviewand 10 diseases were selected that can be thought as significant burden for Turkey andfocused on cost effectiveness topics evaluating health technologies.In our study, based on Cochrane Study Group, randomized clinic trials with costeffectiveness between 2000-2008 were undertaken and 94 full text articles were selectedfor 10 diseases.At 3 articles about Diabetes Mellitus, cost effectiveness of different methods fordifferent interventions were evaluated. Patients? benefit with applied health tecnology wasmeasured with QALYs and life years saved and complicated pregnancy prevented. Costswere determined per QALY or per life year saved or per complicated pregnancy prevented.Studies were randomized clinical trials and powerful for determined benefits and costs ofapplied health tecnologies.The study about pulmoner diseases were randomized clinical trial and costsmeasured which effectiveness measure unit was morbidity and mortality. One article weretaken measuring benefit health tecnology. Effectiveness measure unit was QALY. Costswere calculated per QALY.There was one article published at 2008 measuring the benefits and costs of healthtecnologies used treating depressive disorders. QALYs unit was performed to measure theXR administiration benefit value. Results represent costs for 2 years per QALY and thearticle can be guide for suitable clinical interventions.Searched for musculoskeletal disorders between 2000-2008 and found 4 randomizeclinical trial articles with cost effectiveness.The first three used QALYs unit to evaluate thebenefits of health tecnologies and costs per QALY for cost effectiveness ratios. Both threearticles were persuasive to be sample. The last article?s outcome measure to evaluate thebenefit of health tecnology used was falls prevented. Appraisal of costs were fallsprevented.For neurologic disorders there was one article found published at 2000. Healthtechnology was drug administiration and benefit value was QALYs per relapse.There were too many articles for cardiovascular disorders at MedLine research butonly three were suitable for our criteria. Effectiveness measure unit was QALYs for boththree. Costs were measured per QALY.Consequently, randomized clinic trials are investigated and the results are studiedto guide for the researchers. It?s determined that 10 disease groups choosed for evidencebased interventions were persuasive about cost effectiveness studies. There are too manyarticles that are contradictory to each other and while transmitting information from theliterature, especially determining studies that can be evidence for good clinicalinterventions, systematical review should be done.