OBJECTIVE To investigate the factors related to the granting of preliminary court orders [injunctions] in drug litigations.METHODS A retrospective descriptive study of drug lawsuits in the State of Minas Gerais, Southeastern Brazil, was conducted from October 1999 to 2009. The database consists of 6,112 lawsuits, out of which 6,044 had motions for injunctions and 5,167 included the requisition of drugs. Those with more than one beneficiary were excluded, which totaled 5,072 examined suits. The variables for complete, partial, and suppressed motions were treated as dependent and assessed in relation to those that were independent – lawsuits (year, type, legal representation, defendant, court in which it was filed, adjudication time), drugs (level five of the anatomical therapeutic chemical classification), and diseases (chapter of the International Classification of Diseases). Statistical analyses were performed using the Chi-square test.RESULTS Out of the 5,072 lawsuits with injunctions, 4,184 (82.5%) had the injunctions granted. Granting varied from 95.8% of the total lawsuits in 2004 to 76.9% in 2008. Where there was legal representation, granting exceeded 80.0% and in lawsuits without representation, it did not exceed 66.9%. In public civil actions (89.1%), granting was higher relative to ordinary lawsuits (82.8%) and injunctions (80.1%). Federal courts granted only 68.6% of the injunctions, while the state courts granted 84.8%. Diseases of the digestive system and neoplasms received up to 87.0% in granting, while diseases of the nervous system, mental and behavioral disorders, and diseases of the skin and subcutaneous tissue received granting below 78.6% and showed a high proportion of suspended injunctions (10.9%). Injunctions involving paroxetine, somatropin, and ferrous sulfate drugs were all granted, while less than 54.0% of those involving escitalopram, sodium diclofenac, and nortriptyline were granted.CONCLUSIONS There are significant differences in the granting of injunctions, depending on the procedural and clinical variances. Important trends in the pattern of judicial action were observed, particularly, in the reduced granting [of injunctions] over the period.

Resumo Este trabalho investiga a participação do Sistema de Justiça no processo de efetivação do direito à saúde por meio do confronto de dois caminhos para a atuação judicial. De um lado, a forma predominante, marcada pela individualização das demandas, pela incapacidade de alcançar as falhas políticas que determinam a extensão da oferta de prestações em saúde e pelo potencial de desorganizar o Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS). De outro, uma perspectiva estrutural de atuação que aproxima a intervenção judicial dos conflitos determinantes para a consolidação e sustentabilidade do sistema público de saúde. A partir da análise de pedidos judiciais para acessar os fármacos ranibizumabe e bevacizumabe em Minas Gerais, investiga-se a mudança de cenário esperada no caso de uma atuação judicial estrutural pelo Supremo Tribunal Federal no tratamento das Ações Diretas de Inconstitucionalidade nº 4.234/DF e 5.529/DF. Os resultados apontam para a importância de o Sistema de Justiça privilegiar uma perspectiva estrutural. No atual contexto, marcado por ataques cada vez mais explícitos ao direito à saúde, é fundamental que o Sistema de Justiça participe do processo de efetivação do SUS de forma mais coerente e consciente dos conflitos que definem as possibilidades de construção de um sistema público universal. A crise econômica, o agravamento do subfinanciamento da saúde (em especial devido à Emenda Constitucional nº 95/2016) e o preço insustentável dos novos medicamentos - implicando sua crescente participação na totalidade dos gastos em saúde - apontam para a necessidade de que questões estruturais alcancem centralidade na judicialização da saúde.

Background Equity has been acknowledged as a required principle for the fulfilment of the universal right to health once it seeks to tackle avoidable and unfair inequalities among individuals. In Brazil, a country marked by iniquities, this principle was adopted in the Brazilian National Health System (SUS) organization. But the phenomenon known as judicialization of healthcare, anchored in the argument of universality of the right, has been consolidated as a health policy parallel to the SUS. The analysis of these lawsuits distribution according to their beneficiaries’ socio-economic profile can contribute to the verification of the judicialization’s potential for reducing inequalities, thus becoming an auxiliary activity in the fulfilment of the universal and egalitarian right to health. This study aimed to assess what socioeconomic factors are associated to municipalities that had larger numbers of beneficiaries from lawsuits in health in the state of Minas Gerais, Brazil, from 1999 to 2009. Methods It is a descriptive quantitative study of the residence municipalities of beneficiaries registered in database regarding all deferred lawsuits against the state of Minas Gerais from 1999 to 2009. The verification of cities’ socio-economic profile was performed based on information of the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics’ 2010 Demographic Census and on indexes derived from it. The variables studied for each municipality were: number of beneficiaries; resident population; Social Vulnerability Index (IVS); and Municipal Human Development Index (IDHm). Descriptive and statistical analysis were used to verify factors associated with a larger number of beneficiaries in a municipality. Results Out of 853 municipalities in Minas Gerais, 399 were registered as residence of at least one of the 6.906 beneficiaries of studied lawsuits. The residence non-information index was 11,5%. The minimum number of identified beneficiaries living in a municipality was 1 (one) while the maximum was 1920. The binary logistic regression revealed that high and very high IDHm (OR = 3045; IC = 1773-5228), IVS below 0.323 (OR = 2044; IC = 1099- 3800) and population size above 14.661 inhabitants (OR = 6162; IC = 3733-10,171) are statistically associated to a greater number of beneficiaries of lawsuits in health within a municipality. Conclusions The judicialization of health care in Minas Gerais, from 1999 to 2009, didn’t reach the most vulnerable municipalities. On the contrary, it favored a concentration of health resources in municipalities with better socioeconomic profiles. The register of all beneficiaries’ municipalities of residence as well as individual socioeconomic data can contribute to a more conclusive analysis. Nevertheless, in general, the results of this study suggest that the judicial health policy conducted from 1999 to 2009 was not an auxiliary tool for the fulfilment of an equitable right to health in Minas ...

Resumo A Lei nº 12.401/2011 e o Decreto nº 7.508/2011 são celebrados, entre outros motivos, por introduzir regras inéditas para a política de assistência farmacêutica que teriam o potencial de racionalizar a judicialização da saúde no Brasil. Este estudo visa analisar qual seria o impacto da observância dos critérios de acesso universal à assistência farmacêutica integral, delimitados pelos marcos normativos, no cenário da judicialização de medicamentos em Minas Gerais de 1999 a 2009. Trata-se de um estudo retrospectivo que analisa os litígios judiciais deferidos contra o estado no período. Se os critérios instituídos em 2011 estivessem normalizados e fossem acatados pelo Judiciário no intervalo em pauta, entre 68,84% e 85,77% dos medicamentos judicializados em Minas Gerais teriam sido indeferidos. Contudo, apesar de demonstrar potencial para racionalizar a judicialização, as normativas ainda não parecerem ter influenciado as decisões em saúde de forma determinante.

No abstract