BACKGROUND: Health economic studies attempt to objectivity treatment results to place them in economic. These studies summarize both physician care and other medical services to allow a more rational use of limited resources and are of great value. METHODS: The health economic studies in the literature were analyzed by the conducting countries, financing, the study period and the interval until publication. A quantitative comparison to other specialties in medicine was performed. On the basis of a checklist of basic criteria, a qualitative assessment of the studies was performed to rate the significance. RESULTS: The number of studies showed a fivefold increase. A third of the dermatological studies (n = 71) were conducted in the United States, 23.94% in Great Britain, 9.86% in Sweden and 35.23% in other countries. The interval until publication was 0 to 9 years. CONCLUSIONS: The increase in the number of studies may be explained by the growing demand for clarification of the economical situation. Reasons for the significant differences between different countries might be the financing of the studies or the nature of the dominant health care system. Whereas American studies are predominantly sponsored by pharmaceutical companies, the ones in Great Britain and Sweden are supported by public authorities. The long delays in publishing may be accounted for by long review periods and by difficulties in transferring large amounts of data in international studies. Particularly the introduction of the DRG system in Germany has increased demands for cost-effective action on the basis of well-founded and high-quality health economic studies.
BACKGROUND: Health economic studies attempt to objectivity treatment results to place them in economic. These studies summarize both physician care and other medical services to allow a more rational use of limited resources and are of great value. METHODS: The health economic studies in the literature were analyzed by the conducting countries, financing, the study period and the interval until publication. A quantitative comparison to other specialties in medicine was performed. On the basis of a checklist of basic criteria, a qualitative assessment of the studies was performed to rate the significance. RESULTS: The number of studies showed a fivefold increase. A third of the dermatological studies (n = 71) were conducted in the United States, 23.94% in Great Britain, 9.86% in Sweden and 35.23% in other countries. The interval until publication was 0 to 9 years. CONCLUSIONS: The increase in the number of studies may be explained by the growing demand for clarification of the economical situation. Reasons for the significant differences between different countries might be the financing of the studies or the nature of the dominant health care system. Whereas American studies are predominantly sponsored by pharmaceutical companies, the ones in Great Britain and Sweden are supported by public authorities. The long delays in publishing may be accounted for by long review periods and by difficulties in transferring large amounts of data in international studies. Particularly the introduction of the DRG system in Germany has increased demands for cost-effective action on the basis of well-founded and high-quality health economic studies.