SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Halk Sağlığı Hemşireliği Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 8 Sayı: 2

Examination of Health Economics Studies Conducted on Public Health Nursing Subject Areas: A Scoping Review

Halk Sağlığı Hemşireliği Konu Alanlarına Yönelik Yapılan Sağlık Ekonomisi Çalışmalarının İncelenmesi: Bir Kapsam Değerlendirmesi

Kübra Kabalcı(İZMİR KATİP ÇELEBİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-3419-5999
Medine Yılmaz(İZMİR KATİP ÇELEBİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-3962-5820
Pages
83–97
Publication Date
2026-08-27
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusion: Results at both the international and national levels indicate that initiatives carried out in various areas of public health nursing play a critical role in ensuring the sustainability of health systems and improving public health.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: This scoping review was conducted to examine health economics studies related to the subject area of public health nursing.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Method: The reviews were conducted by scanning English and Turkish language articles between September 2025 and January 2026.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: Results at both the international and national levels indicate that initiatives carried out in various areas of public health nursing play a critical role in ensuring the sustainability of health systems and improving public health.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:2025 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Halk Sağlığı Hemşireliği · Sağlık Ekonomisi · Maliyet Analizi

Abstract

Aim: This scoping review was conducted to examine health economics studies related to the subject area of public health nursing. Method: The reviews were conducted by scanning English and Turkish language articles between September 2025 and January 2026. PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Science, and YÖKtez databases were used for the search. The keywords and synonyms used in the search were “public health nursing”, “community health nursing”, “cost analysis”, “health economics”, “school health”, “occupational health”, “home health nursing”, “elderly health”, and “child health”. Based on the determined inclusion and exclusion criteria, 71 articles (62 international, 9 national) were accessed, and 49 articles (41 international, 8 national) were evaluated for eligibility. The searches were carried out based on the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. A total of 21 studies (19 international, 2 national) that met the scope of the review were included in the analysis. Results: The earliest identified study was a cost-effectiveness analysis in occupational health nursing conducted in 1983, while the most recent was a cost-effectiveness analysis in women’s health conducted in 2025. Eleven of the studies were randomized controlled trials, three were retrospective, three were case-control studies, one was a cohort study, and one was a prospective cohort study; one was a program evaluation, and one was a systematic review. In terms of application areas, studies in the fields of geriatric health and maternal and child health stand out; these are followed by studies in women’s health, chronic disease management, community mental health, and occupational health. Conclusion: Results at both the international and national levels indicate that initiatives carried out in various areas of public health nursing play a critical role in ensuring the sustainability of health systems and improving public health.

Özet

Amaç: Bu kapsam değerlendirmesi, halk sağlığı hemşireliği konu alanlarına yönelik yapılan sağlık ekonomisi çalışmalarının incelenmesi amacıyla yapılmıştır. Yöntem: Değerlendirmeler Eylül 2025-Ocak 2026 tarihleri arasında İngilizce ve Türkçe makaleler taranarak yapılmıştır. Tarama için Pubmed, Google Scholar, Web of Science, Yöktez veri tabanları kullanılmıştır. Taramada “halk sağlığı hemşireliği”, “toplum sağlığı hemşireliği”, “maliyet analizi”, “sağlık ekonomisi”, “okul sağlığı”, “iş sağlığı”, “evde sağlık hemşireliği”, “yaşlı sağlığı” ve “çocuk sağlığı” anahtar kelimeleri ve eş anlamlı ifadeleri kullanılmıştır. Belirlenen dahil etme ve dışlama kriterlerine göre 71 makaleye (62 uluslararası, 9 ulusal) ulaşılmış olup, 49 makale (41 uluslararası, 8 ulusal) uygunluk açısından değerlendirilmiştir. Taramalar PRISMA-ScR yönergeleri temel alınarak gerçekleştirilmiştir. Kapsam değerlendirme amacına uygun 21 çalışma (19 uluslararası, 2 ulusal) analize dahil edilmiştir. Bulgular: Çalışmaların en eskisi 1983 yılında iş sağlığı hemşireliği, en güncel çalışma 2025 yılında kadın sağlığı alanında yapılmış maliyet etkililik analizi çalışmalarıdır. Çalışmaların 11’i randomize kontrollü, üçü retrospektif, üçü vaka karşılaştırmalı, biri kohort, biri prospektif kohort çalışma tipinde olup biri program değerlendirme ve birisi de sistematik incelemedir. Uygulama alanları açısından özellikle yaşlı sağlığı ve anne-çocuk sağlığı alanında yapılan çalışmalar ön plana çıkmakta; bunları kadın sağlığı, kronik hastalık yönetimi, toplum ruh sağlığı ve iş sağlığı çalışmaları izlemektedir. Sonuç: Hem uluslararası hem de ulusal düzeydeki araştırma sonuçları, halk sağlığı hemşireliğinin farklı alanlarında yürütülen girişimlerin sağlık sistemlerinin sürdürülebilirliği ve toplum sağlığının geliştirilmesi açısından kritik bir rol oynadığını göstermektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Kabalcı, K., Yılmaz, M. (2026). Examination of Health Economics Studies Conducted on Public Health Nursing Subject Areas: A Scoping Review. Halk Sağlığı Hemşireliği Dergisi, Cilt: 8 Sayı: 2, 83–97. https://doi.org/10.54061/jphn.1938782

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (37)

  1. Ağartioğlu Kundakçi, G., Yılmaz, M., & Sözmen, M. K. (2020). Determination of the costs of falls in the older people according to the decision tree model. Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics, 87, Article 104007. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.archger.2019.104007
  2. Akyol, B. & Haykır, H. (2022). Sağlık ekonomisi üzerine güncel bir derleme çalışması. Journal of Business and Communication Studies, 1(2), 179-192. https://doi.org/10.29228/jobacs.67271
  3. Aslan, E., & Top, M. (2021). Sağlık Ekonomisi. Siyasal Kitabevi.
  4. Ballreich, J., Frick, K. D., Huettner, S., Perin, J., Gaydos, C., Anders, J., Rothman, R., & Trent, M. (2025). Cost-effectiveness analysis of the technology-enhanced community health nursing program for adolescent girls and young adult women with pelvic inflammatory disease. Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 52(6), 338-344 https://doi.org/10.1097/OLQ.0000000000002143
  5. Byrne, G., Lynott, A., Caffrey, B., Murphy, F., O'Sullivan, K., Dunne, N., Carroll, N., McGolderick, G., Joyce, D., & Phelan, A. (2026). A survey of nurses' views of the current and future role of Community Registered General Nurses (CRGN). Journal of Advanced Nursing, 82(3), 2282-2294. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.17089
  6. Bohingamu Mudiyanselage, S., Price, A. M. H., Mensah, F. K., Bryson, H. E., Perlen, S., Orsini, F., Hiscock, H., Dakin, P., Harris, D., Noble, K., Bruce, T., Kemp, L., Goldfeld, S., & Gold, L. (2021). Economic evaluation of an Australian nurse home visiting programme: A randomised trial at 3 years. BMJ Open, 11(12), Article e052156. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-052156
  7. Brumfield, C. (1996). 24-hour mother-infant discharge with a follow-up home health visit: Results in a selected medicaid population. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 88(4), 544–548. https://doi.org/10.1016/0029-7844(96)00267-0
  8. Carswell, F., Robinson, E. J., Hek, G., & Shenton, T. (1989). A Bristol experience: Benefits and cost of an “asthma nurse” visiting the homes of asthmatic children. Bristol Medico-Chirurgical Journal 104(1), 11–12. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5113576/
  9. Cbappell, H., & Dickey, C. (1993). Decreased rehospitalization costs through intermittent nursing visits to nursing home patients. The Journal of Nursing Administration, 23(3), 49–52. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005110-199303000-00012
  10. Chelak, K., & Chakole, S. (2023). The role of social determinants of health in promoting health equality: a narrative review. Cureus, 15(1), e33425. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.33425
  11. Çakmak, İ., & Öztürk, S. (2022). Türkiye’de bireylerin sağlık kuruluşları tercihlerini etkileyen faktörlerin analizi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 40(1), 44-57. https://doi.org/10.17065/huniibf.922935
  12. Drummond, M. F., Sculpher, M., Claxton, K., Stoddart, G. L., & Torrance, G. W. (2015). Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes (4th ed.). Oxford University Press.
  13. Erkin, Ö., Kalkın, A., & Göl, İ. (Ed.). (2021). Halk sağlığı hemşireliği. Çukurova Nobel Tıp.
  14. Feldman, P. H., Murtaugh, C. M., Pezzin, L. E., McDonald, M. V., & Peng, T. R. (2005). Just‐in‐time evidence‐based e‐mail “reminders” in home health care: Impact on patient outcomes. Health Services Research, 40(3), 865–886. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6773.2005.00389.x
  15. Folland, S., Goodman, A. C., Stano, M., & Danagoulian, S. (2024). The economics of health and health care (9th ed.). Routledge.
  16. García-Peña, C., Thorogood, M., Wonderling, D., & Reyes-Frausto, S. (2002). Economic analysis of a pragmatic randomised trial of home visits by a nurse to elderly people with hypertension in Mexico. Salud Pública de México, 44(1), 14-20. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0036-36342002000100002
  17. Harrison, M. (2001). In-home nursing care for women with high-risk pregnancies: Outcomes and cost. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 97(6), 982–987. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0029-7844(01)01360-6
  18. ICN. (2024). 2024 yılı ICN teması “Hemşirelerin ekonomik gücü” [Mektup]. Türk Hemşireler Derneği. https://www.thder.org.tr/icn-bakimin-ekonomik-gucu-2024-degisim-icin-temel-sartlar
  19. Koçak, H. S. (2014). Sınıf öğretmenlerine verilen web tabanlı ve bireysel eğitimin Tip 2 diyabet riskini önlemeye etkisi ve maliyet etkinliği [Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi]. Erciyes Üniversitesi.
  20. Logan, A. G., Milne, B. J., Flanagan, P. T., & Haynes, R. B. (1983). Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of monitoring blood pressure of hypertensive employees at work. Hypertension, 5(6), 828–836. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.HYP.5.6.828
  21. McCrone, P., Beecham, J., & Knapp, M. (1994). Community psychiatric nurse teams: Cost-effectiveness of intensive support versus generic care. British Journal of Psychiatry, 165(2), 218–221. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.165.2.218
  22. McPake, B., Normand, C., Nolan, A., & Smith, S. (2020). Health economics: An international perspective (4th ed.). Routledge.
  23. Mehrabirad, F., Tolabi, T., & Heydarizadeh, K. (2025). The role of nursing in health economics: A narrative review study. Evidence Based Health Policy, Management and Economics, 9(2), 120-129. https://doi.org/10.18502/jebhpme.v9i2.20205
  24. Mynors-Wallis, L., Davies, I., Gray, A., Barbour, F., & Gath, D. (1997). A randomised controlled trial and cost analysis of problem-solving treatment for emotional disorders given by community nurses in primary care. British Journal of Psychiatry, 170(2), 113–119. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.170.2.113
  25. Olds, D. L., Henderson, C. R., Phelps, C., Kitzman, H., & Hanks, C. (1993). Effect of prenatal and infancy nurse home visitation on government spending. Medical Care, 31(2), 155–174. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-199302000-00006
  26. Palumbo, M. V., Sikorski, E. A., & Liberty, B. C. (2013). Exploring the cost-effectiveness of unit-based health promotion activities for nurses. Workplace Health & Safety, 61(12), 514–520. https://doi.org/10.1177/216507991306101203
  27. Pugh, L. C., Milligan, R. A., Frick, K. D., Spatz, D., & Bronner, Y. (2002). Breastfeeding duration, costs, and benefits of a support program for low‐income breastfeeding women. Birth, 29(2), 95–100. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-536X.2002.00169.x
  28. Quad Council Coalition. (2018). Community / Public health nursing competencies.
  29. Saing, S., Parkinson, B., Church, J., & Goodall, S. (2018). Cost effectiveness of a community-delivered consultation to improve infant sleep problems and maternal well-being. Value in Health Regional Issues, 15, 91–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vhri.2017.12.004
  30. Salvador, A., Davies, B., Kee Fung, K., Clinch, J., Coyle, D., & Sweetman, A. (2003). Program evaluation of hospital-based antenatal home care for high-risk women. Healthcare Quarterly, 6(3), 67–73. https://doi.org/10.12927/hcq.16638
  31. Stricklin, M. L. V., Jones, S., & Niles, S. A. (2000). Home TalkTM/Healthy Talk: Improving patients' health status with telephone technology. Home Healthcare Nurse, 18(1), 53–61. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004045-200001000-00017
  32. Suijker, J. J., MacNeil-Vroomen, J. L., Van Rijn, M., Buurman, B. M., De Rooij, S. E., Moll Van Charante, E. P., & Bosmans,
  33. J. E. (2017). Cost-effectiveness of nurse-led multifactorial care to prevent or postpone new disabilities in community-living older people: Results of a cluster randomized trial. PLOS ONE, 12(4), Article e0175272. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0175272
  34. Şahman, O. (2026). Hastane sektöründe finansal performansın oran analizi ve finansal yaşam endeksi ile ölçülmesi: Türkiye Cumhuriyet Merkez Bankası örneği. Oğuzhan Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 8(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.55580/oguzhan.1796422
  35. Walker, A. (1996). The cost-effectiveness of home health: A case presentation: Home health care is a cost-effective alternative to institutionalization. Geriatric Nursing, 17(1), 37–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0197-4572(96)80012-7
  36. Zorkun, M., & Bülbül, D. (2022). 2000-2021 dönemi Türkiye’de sağlık harcamalarının incelenmesi ve değerlendirilmesi. Bilecik Şeyh Edebali Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 7(1), 125-140. https://doi.org/10.33905/bseusbed.1180587
  37. Salvador, A., Davies, B., Kee Fung, K., Clinch, J., Coyle, D., & Sweetman, A. (2003). Program evaluation of hospital-based antenatal home care for high-risk women. Healthcare Quarterly, 6(3), 67–73. https://doi.org/10.12927/hcq.16638