---

Introduction: Coronary heart disease risk factors assessment and control is critical for preventing cardiovascular attacks and improving the health of people. The aim of the present study was to compare the status of control of the epidemic of heart coronary artery diseases in selected countries and Iran.
Methods: This comparative study was carried out in 11 countries (with define criteria). Databases, such as Medline, PubMed, Rozent, Elsevier, and Google Scholar were used with keywords of "Non communicable diseases", "coronary artery disease", "cardiovascular disease”, and "epidemic control". Ninety printed and electronic articles were obtained. Data was collected using “Check List of Control on the Epidemic of Heart Coronary Artery Diseases" in five dimensions with 35 items. The content validity index of the check list was evaluated and confirmed with 17 experts and Cronbach's alpha with 12 experts. 
Results: The findings of this study showed similarities, for instance all countries had common risk factors for coronary artery disease. Most countries, had responsive systems for controlling and preventing coronary artery diseases in their structure. The differences included major issues, such as “total expenditure on health as a percentage of gross domestic product”, “general government expenditure on health as a percentage of total expenditure on health”, “private expenditure on health as a percentage of total expenditure on health”, “general government expenditure on health as a percentage of total government expenditure”, and “social security expenditure on health as a percentage of general government expenditure on health”. Also, “out-of-pocket expenditure as a percentage of private expenditure on health” was very different in Iran compared with the selected countries.
Conclusions: The comparison of responsive systems, health financing, and risk factors for coronary artery disease in Iran and selected countries had several differences and similarities. It is suggested to create a policy framework for regulation and public education for the prevention and control of coronary heart disease.

 

---

Introduction: Women heads of households sometimes feel lonely and helpless due to the many responsibilities of life. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of “Reality Therapy” and “Narrative Therapy” on the loneliness of women heads of households. 
Methods: The method of the present study was quasi-experimental with pretest, posttest and follow-up with control group. The statistical population of this study consists of women heads of households under the auspices of the Bojnourd province Veterans and Martyrs Affair Foundation (VMAF) was included in 2020. 45 of them were selected by convenience sampling method. Then, they were randomly divided into two intervention groups and one control group by lottery method. Data were collected using a demographic questionnaire and the “UCLA Loneliness Scale” (Version 3). Content validity was calculated by qualitative method and reliability by internal consistency method by calculating Cronbach's alpha coefficient. The first intervention group received “Reality Therapy” and the second intervention group received “Narrative Therapy” in 8 sessions and the control group was on the waiting list to receive the intervention. Data analysis was analyzed in SPSS. 21. 
Results: “Reality Therapy” and “Narrative Therapy” were effective on the loneliness of women heads of households (P <0.05). Comparison of 2 interventions showed that there is a significant difference between the effectiveness of “Reality Therapy” and “Narrative Therapy” on reducing loneliness in women-headed households and “Narrative Therapy” has been more effective on reducing loneliness over time (P <0.05).
Conclusions: “Narrative Therapy” over time has played an effective role in reducing the loneliness of women-headed households. It is recommended that this treatment be performed to reduce feelings of loneliness in other women heads of households and similar groups.