Goal: The aim of the study was to identify economic burden from hypertention in Ulaanbaatar and develop some recommenadations. Material and Method: The top down approach was used to calculate direct costs of hypertension in five hospitals of the secondary and tertiary levels. To calculate cost of hypertension financial reports and cost centres data were used. A self-administered questionnaire was used to calculate indirect costs from the disease. Patients, admitted to six UB district and three tertiary level hospitals due to hypertension filled in the questionnaire. Data was analysed using SPSS 15 programme.Results: Some 114 patients were surveyed. The average cost of hypertension was 143914 ± 38189.5 (average bed days 8.7) and 264756 ± 40760.4¥ (average bed days 9.5) in the selected district and tertiary level hospitals respectively. The average cost for per out-patient visit was 4237 ± 2123.5¥ in the selected district hospitals and 3,162 ± 308.3¥ in the selected tertiary level hospitals. The indirect costs included transport cost to and from hospital, food, transport cost of relatives to visit them, cost of medications, and some other expenses related to their admission. Average indirect cost of an admission of patients with the hypertension was 253,395 and 212,717.44¥ in district and tertiary level hospitals respectively. Economic burden from temporary loss of working ablility due to hypertension was 177.1 millions tugrigs. National average wage was 300500¥ in 2009. Some 65.8% of respondents used antihypertension drugs at least once a day and average cost was 653.4¥ per patient per day. Annual and 10 years drug use estimates were 238491 and 2.3 million tugrigs per patient respectively (Inflation and price changes were not counted).Conclusion: Indirect and direct costs for admission were 1.1 billion (49.6%) and 939 million (42.5%) tugrigs respectively. Cost of hypertension in Ulaanbaatar was 2.2 billion tugrigs in 2009 and it is 1.1% of total health sector financing.

Introduction: About 20-30% of patients with acute pancreatitis have a severe disease and mortality rate among inpatients were 15%. There are many causes of acute pancreatitis (AP), but most common cause of AP is an alcohol. According to some studies in our country, alcohol is the number one cause of acute pancreatitis and the mortality rate is 15.3%. Very important for prognosis of disease optimal choice of treatment tactics, detection of infectious evidence of necrotizing pancreatitis. Therefore, based on the above, there is an urgent need to conduct research to address important issues and to improve the diagnosis and treatment of acute alcohol-induced pancreatic necrosis. Goal: Determine the importance of early diagnostic assessment of alcohol induced severe acute necrotizing pancreatitis. Materials and Methods: Research model and research method. We conducted our research using an observational research model and a factual research method.Sampling of research materials will be carried out by targeted sampling. From November 1, 2008 to January 1, 2020, 122 patients who were hospitalized with alcohol-inducedAP were selected and archival documents or medical histories were selected. Statistical analysis was performed using averages and regression analysis methods to calculate the laboratory parameters in the analysis related to the new evaluation system. Results: The minimum age of patients with ANP was 25 and the maximum was 71, with the majority (87.4%) aged 26 to 60 years. When the Person Correlation method calculates the relationship between alcohol consumption and mortality, it is assumed that the weaker the correlation, the higher the amount of alcohol consumed, the lower the cure and the higher the mortality. Of the 31 deaths reported in the study, 24 (77.4%) were hospitalized more than 72 hours after the onset of the disease. Late hospitalization and late treatment of patients with acute necrotizing pancreatitis (ANP) disease have been shown to adversely affect the prognosis of the disease. In our study, all parameters were significant, but procalcitonin, serum amylase, serum lipase, serum LDG8 C-reactive protein, serum glucose was found to be higher than the value specified in the evaluation system for the variable (in determining pancreatic necrosis). АNOVA analysis test showed that white blood cells, procalcitonin, serum amilza, serum lipaza, serumglucose, serum LDG, C-reactive protein were higher than those specified in the evaluation system, and that the level of significance for the variable (indicating a severe pancreatitis or poor prognosis) was higher than other test results (P <0.01). According to the new evaluation system, 12 out of 122 patients were classified as A class or 0-3, 69 (56.5%) patients were class B or 4-6, and 41 (33.6%) patients were class C or >7 points. Of the total cases, 90.1% were rated as severe form of ANP and pancreatic necrosis by the classification system we developed. When we assessed the prognosis with the new assessment system, we found that 100 percent of patients in category A were cured, 89.8 percent of patients in category B were cured, and 41.5 percent of patients in category C were cured and 58.5 percent died. Statistical calculations using the correlation analysis method for the correlation between the score and the cure of the evaluation system shows negative correlation (P <0.01) other words, the higher the score of the evaluation system, the lower the cure rate and the higher the mortality rate. Conclusion In Mongolia, relatively young men suffer from alcohol-induced pancreatitis.Factors contributing to the development of necrosis in acute pancreatitis include alcohol abuse, prolonged alcohol use, delayed hospitalization, and delayed treatment.In our study, following clinical signs and laboratory findings are effective in distinguishing severe forms of acute necrotizing pancreatitis, early diagnosis, assessment of prognosis. Laboratorytests include: increase in white blood cells, procalcitonin, serum amylase, serum LDH, serum lipase, C-reactive protein and a decrease in hematocrit, serum calcium.