Background: The economic, political, and geographical landscapes of certain neighboring countries of Iran have created potential opportunities and capacities that, if effectively harnessed, can propel Iran towards rapid economic growth and development. Azerbaijan, owing to its geographic proximity with a 765-kilometre border with Iran and numerous cultural ties, stands out as one of the most promising commercial opportunities for Iran. Methods: This study unfolds in five overarching stages. Initially, an examination of published texts and articles is conducted to identify challenges and opportunities. Subsequently, interviews with experts are conducted to refine and supplement the questionnaire to identify challenges and opportunities and encapsulate factors influencing drug exports from Iran to Azerbaijan. Following this, a structured questionnaire is developed based on the extracted factors from the preceding stages, and interviews with experts are conducted using the structured questionnaire. Finally, the results obtained are analyzed using the Simple Additive Weighting (SAW) method to facilitate the enhancement of drug exports from Iran to Azerbaijan. Results: After scrutinizing the infrastructure and opportunities for drug exports to Azerbaijan, we have reached fourteen influential factors, and after ranking the factors influencing pharmaceutical exports to Azerbaijan, it becomes evident that market and sales-related factors, laws, and regulations, as well as quality and supply chain considerations, respectively, are among the most significant factors affecting drug exports from Iran to Azerbaijan. Conclusion: The study has suggested that most important factors that affect the Iran- Azerbaijan pharmaceutical business market research, price differentials, and networking with influential individuals in Azerbaijan, it provided effective strategies for enhancing pharmaceutical exports to Azerbaijan. Furthermore, internal challenges within Iranian pharmaceutical companies, including regulatory compliance, quality assurance, and limited international certifications, underscored the necessity for cohesive collaboration between governmental entities and private enterprises to streamline export processes and enhance competitiveness in the global market. 

Background: To assess the LOS and costs for hospitalized CKD patients, to compare the pharmacoeconomic-related direct medical and non-medical costs among pre-dialysis and dialysis patients, and to determine the impact of CKD with other comorbidities on hospital LOS and cost. Methods:  An observational study was conducted on 160 patients admitted to the Nephrology Department. From the collected data, the direct and indirect costs of the treatment were analyzed using a standard questionnaire. Results: Dialysis was significantly correlated with total cost and total indirect cost rather than total direct cost. The statistical analysis showed that comorbidities and LOS were not significantly correlated, which shows that CKD alone is responsible for increased LOS. Both LOS and cost were significantly correlated (p-value 0.00). The stage of CKD and the type of treatment being used are the main determinants of LOS. Direct medical, direct non-medical, and total direct costs were significantly related to comorbidities (p-value 0.004, 0.005, and 0.058, respectively). Conclusion:  The study revealed that dialysis was significantly correlated with total cost and total indirect cost. Dialysis treatments, hospital stays, and other CKD-related requirements necessitated many time-consuming visits and procedures. According to the study's analysis of the data, there is no statistically significant relationship between comorbidities and LOS. This demonstrates that the lengthening of stays is solely attributable to CKD

Background: Drug and hoteling costs account for approximately 30%   of hospital expenses. Therefore, a thorough focus on the efficiency and costs of this sector is of special importance for hospitals, as scrutinizing these costs can enhance service quality. It appears that insurance payments for hoteling services may not be economically viable for government hospitals.  Hence, this study was conducted to examine this assumption. This study aimed to compare allocated hoteling costs with the actual amounts and assess the profit and loss in Ayatollah Mosavi Zanjan Educational-Medical   Center in the years 2018 and 2019. Methods: The number and monetary value of hoteling items delivered from the pharmacy unit to the medical departments (each department separately) during 2018 and 2019 were determined by extracting data from the   HIS system. Additionally, the occupied bed days for each department were identified, and the amount received in rials from insurance organizations (6%   income from hoteling services) was confirmed with the hospital's financial unit. Results: The research findings indicate significant differences in hoteling costs across various hospital departments. CCU, NICU, and Women's   Active Ward were more profitable, while AICU, ICU-OH, and BICU incurred losses. Outpatient cases and certain departments were not covered by hoteling. Non-hoteling items also contributed to hospital losses.   Furthermore, it was revealed that hoteling costs increased by 64% in 2019, while insurance tariffs saw only a 15% increase. Conclusion: The majority of hospital departments running at a loss can have detrimental effects on patient care quality. Therefore, this issue requires oversight from the Ministry of Health, Treatment Deputy, insurance organizations, and hospital management

Background: Acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) has a high prevalence at early age and in children and regard to life expectancy index this disease cause to losing many years of life in these patients. Two well-known European protocols called United Kingdom (UK-ALL) and Berlin-Frankfurt-Munster (BFM-ALL) protocols are used to treat the disease in most countries of the world and in Iran, so the objective of this study is modelling of the treatment process using both protocols to estimate more ‎cost-effectiveness method. Methods: A decision tree model was applied to depict the real treatment process to calculate costs per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Total costs were included to the model. Results: The cost effectiveness ratio of UK-ALL is lower than BFM-ALL (1145.52 USD /3.87 QALY for UK-ALL and 1942.35 USD /3.02 QALY for BFM-ALL). Therefore, the UK-ALL is dominant and BFM-ALL is dominated.‎ Conclusions: The modeling results showed a double difference between the two studied options so to better cancer management, policymakers and oncologist ‎should advocate the economic evaluation methods and modeling to select a real option in the treatment of patients to save resources like UK-ALL.

Background: This narrative review aims to explore the necessity for pharmacoeconomic studies in homeopathy, elucidating key factors and methodologies essential for conducting such assessments. In contemporary healthcare, evidence-based practices are fundamental for ensuring optimal patient outcomes and resource allocation. Essential steps for conducting pharmacoeconomic studies in homeopathy involve study design, intervention identification, comparator selection, outcome measures definition, data collection, cost analysis, effectiveness analysis, cost-effectiveness analysis, cost-benefit analysis, sensitivity analysis, reporting, and peer review. While conventional medicine undergoes rigorous pharmacoeconomic evaluations, the field of homeopathy often lacks such scrutiny. However, the importance of pharmacoeconomic studies in homeopathy is increasingly recognized, given its growing integration into modern healthcare systems. Methods: A systematic search of electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science) was performed to identify relevant literature using keywords such as "homeopathy," "pharmacoeconomics," and "efficacy." Articles meeting inclusion criteria were assessed for quality using established frameworks like the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS). Data synthesis was conducted thematically, focusing on study objectives, methodologies, findings, and conclusions. Results: Ten pharmacoeconomic studies within homeopathy were identified, demonstrating varying degrees of compliance with reporting guidelines. While most studies reported costs comprehensively, some lacked methodological transparency, particularly in analytic methods. Heterogeneity was observed in study designs and outcome measures, reflecting the complexity of economic evaluation in homeopathy. Quality of evidence varied, with some studies exhibiting robust methodologies while others had limitations. Conclusion: Based on the review, recommendations include promoting homeopathic clinics, providing policy support, adopting collaborative healthcare models, and leveraging India's homeopathic resources. Pharmacoeconomic studies in homeopathy are crucial for evaluating its economic implications compared to conventional medicine. While certain studies demonstrated methodological rigor, opportunities exist for enhancing consistency, transparency, and quality in economic evaluations. Addressing these challenges is essential for informing decision-making regarding the economic aspects of homeopathic interventions.