Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30786892›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2019

Administrative cases: an effective alternative to lawsuits in assuring access to medicines?

Virginia Oliveira Chagas, Mércia Pandolfo Provin, Rita Goreti Amaral

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Virginia Oliveira ChagasFederal University of Goiás, 388 Residential Breeze from the Woods 37 St. apt 201 Jataí, Goiás, 75800-000, Brazil. virginiafarm@gmail.com.
Mércia Pandolfo ProvinFederal University of Goiás, 388 Residential Breeze from the Woods 37 St. apt 201 Jataí, Goiás, 75800-000, Brazil.
Rita Goreti AmaralFederal University of Goiás, 388 Residential Breeze from the Woods 37 St. apt 201 Jataí, Goiás, 75800-000, Brazil.

Funding

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Goiás 201410267000327
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough public policy in Brazil supports access to essential medicines, the health system cannot meet all demand. Increasingly, the population has used legal demands to seek access to medicines, an approach that can undermine equitable access by creating policy inconsistencies (e.g., granting access to medicines outside the SUS formulary). In response, the Executive Branch has signed institutional agreements to create an administrative case for submitting requests for medicines directly to the Executive Branch. The objective of this study was to assess the degree to which the administrative cases for requests are in accordance with public policies and guidelines, e.g., if administrative cases results in fewer decisions to purchase outside the SUS formulary.

methodsThis descriptive study used secondary data from lawsuits filed against the Executive Branch from 2003 to 2015 and from administrative cases granted by the Executive Branch from 2010 to 2015 in the capital of a state located in the central-western region of Brazil. The variables included plaintiffs' sociodemographic characteristics and diseases as well as the characteristics of the medical products sought via the processes.

resultsComparing the requests submitted through lawsuits and the administrative cases revealed differences in the incomes of plaintiffs and the costs of medicines. Both methods for submission recorded requests for medicines for diseases of endocrine and circulatory systems; the only difference was the prevalence of diseases of the genitourinary system in the lawsuits. A higher proportion of lawsuits sought medicines outside the SUS formulary with therapeutic alternatives, while medicines outside the SUS formulary without an alternative were more commonly requested in administrative cases.

conclusionAdministrative cases adhere to the public policies and guidelines of the SUS. The administrative cases results in fewer decisions to purchase outside the SUS formulary with alternative, and more decisions to purchase drugs for which there is a formulary alternative. In addition, administrative cases provide greater equity by favoring lower income applicants. However, administrative cases also reveal deficiencies in the State's implementation of existing pharmaceutical policies. The public pressure for effective implementation of existing policies may help expand access to medicines.

Indexed as

BrazilDrugs, EssentialGovernment ProgramsHealth Care RationingHealth PolicyHealth Services AccessibilityHumansPovertyPublic PolicySocioeconomic FactorsDrugs, EssentialJudicial decisionsJudicialization of healthPharmaceutical servicesRight to health

Identifiers

PMID30786892
PMCPMC6381663

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.