Borges Danielle da Costa Leite, Ugá Maria Alicia Dominguez
European University Institute, Firenze, Italia.
Cad Saude Publica. 2010 Jan;26(1):59-69. doi: 10.1590/s0102-311x2010000100007.
Based on an analysis of individual claims for provision of medicines brought by users of the Unified National Health System (SUS) against the State of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in the year 2005, this study aims to discuss the action and behavior of the court system in ruling on these suits. The study adopted a semi-qualitative exploratory documental research design, analyzing key aspects related to the claims, such as type of medication claimed by the plaintiff, wording of the court rulings, and the key elements used by judges in trying the cases. According to the analysis of the lawsuits and the concepts of judicialization and official standardization of medicines, the study concludes that when ruling on the provision of medicines, the court system grants the claims as submitted without considering the standardization of medicines adopted by the Ministry of Health, thus exercising excessive court intervention in health policy.
基于对2005年巴西里约热内卢州国家统一卫生系统(SUS)用户针对该州提起的药品供应个人索赔的分析,本研究旨在探讨法院系统在裁决这些诉讼时的行动和行为。该研究采用了半定性探索性文献研究设计,分析了与索赔相关的关键方面,如原告索赔的药物类型、法院裁决的措辞以及法官审理案件时使用的关键要素。根据对诉讼的分析以及药品司法化和官方标准化的概念,该研究得出结论,在裁决药品供应问题时,法院系统按提交的索赔进行批准,而不考虑卫生部采用的药品标准化,从而在卫生政策方面过度行使了法院干预权。