Legal and health variations in drug litigation injunctions granted in Minas Gerais

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

Por que as pessoas recorrem ao Judiciário para obter o acesso aos medicamentos? O caso das insulinas análogas na Bahia

As insulinas análogas são alvo de controvérsias quanto à sua superioridade terapêutica em relação às humanas. Talvez, em parte, devido a isso, são objetos frequentes de ações judicias. A judicialização da saúde tem sido muito estudada, mas pouco se sabe sobre os motivos que levam as pessoas a recorrerem ao Judiciário para obter acesso a medicamentos no SUS. Sendo assim, o presente estudo tem por objetivo analisar os motivos que levaram as pessoas a recorrerem ao Judiciário para obter o acesso às insulinas análogas no estado da Bahia, tratando-se de um estudo de caso apoiado em fonte documental. Foram analisadas, entre 2010 e 2013, 149 ações judiciais que solicitaram o fornecimento de análogas pela secretaria estadual da saúde. Os motivos do recurso à Justiça, citados nos autos, podem ser classificados em: hipossuficiência financeira do usuário, necessidade de insulina análoga, dever e obrigação do Estado em fornecê-las e dificuldades burocráticas. Majoritariamente, as pessoas recorreram ao Judiciário, porque os médicos que as acompanham, divergindo das políticas oficiais, acreditam que as insulinas análogas são melhores do que às humanas e o sistema público de saúde não as dispensa, não dispondo elas de condições financeiras que lhes permitam adquiri-las com recursos próprios.Rio de Janeir