Suppr超能文献

[司法求助与获得卫生技术:机遇与风险 司法介入与获得卫生技术:机遇与风险]

[Judicial recourse and access to health technologies: opportunities and risksJudicialização e acesso a tecnologias em saúde: oportunidades e riscos].

作者信息

Vidal Jaume, Di Fabio Y José Luis

机构信息

Health Action International (HAI) Health Action International (HAI) Health Action International (HAI), Ámsterdam, Países Bajos.

Organización Panamericana de la Salud Organización Panamericana de la Salud Washington D.C. Estados Unidos de América Organización Panamericana de la Salud, Washington D.C., Estados Unidos de América.

出版信息

Rev Panam Salud Publica. 2017 Dec 5;41:e137. doi: 10.26633/RPSP.2017.137. eCollection 2017.

Abstract

Use of litigation to ensure and guarantee access to medical inputs constitutes one of the most effective strategies to ensure observance (or remedy the violation) of the right to health, often in relation to other fundamental human rights such as the right to life or to bodily integrity.More frequently, and in multiple national contexts, judges and courts support lawsuits filed by individuals who need immediate access to health technologies. On many occasions, the rulings that force the State and its institutions to guarantee the supply of a given product do not take into account the reasons the State gives for not providing it, which can range from cost-effectiveness calculations and evaluation, to public policy planning and implementation.Use and abuse of legal proceedings by interested third parties threaten the legitimacy of an instrument that has contributed, without a doubt, to strengthening public engagement in the defense of people's rights, including the right to health.This document is an attempt to provide a context for the evolution of this phenomenon with regard to the instruments, mechanisms, and procedures commonly used by health authorities to efficiently organize access to health technologies. In addition, steps to follow are suggested for both national and regional settings.

摘要

利用诉讼来确保获取医疗资源是保障(或补救对健康权的侵犯)健康权的最有效策略之一,这通常与其他基本人权相关,如生命权或身体完整性权。更常见的是,在多个国家背景下,法官和法院支持那些需要立即获取医疗技术的个人提起的诉讼。在许多情况下,迫使国家及其机构保证提供特定产品的裁决并未考虑国家给出的不提供该产品的理由,这些理由可能包括成本效益计算和评估、公共政策规划与实施等。利益相关第三方对法律程序的使用和滥用威胁到了一种无疑有助于加强公众参与捍卫包括健康权在内的人民权利的手段的合法性。本文试图为这一现象在卫生当局为有效组织获取医疗技术而常用的手段、机制和程序方面的演变提供背景。此外,还针对国家和地区层面提出了后续步骤建议。

相似文献

3
Legal access to medications: a threat to Brazil's public health system?
BMC Health Serv Res. 2017 Jul 19;17(1):499. doi: 10.1186/s12913-017-2430-x.
4
Access to medicines for chronic diseases in Brazil: a multidimensional approach.
Rev Saude Publica. 2016 Dec;50(suppl 2):6s. doi: 10.1590/S1518-8787.2016050006161.
5
Access to treatment for phenylketonuria by judicial means in Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil.
Cien Saude Colet. 2015 May;20(5):1607-16. doi: 10.1590/1413-81232015205.08302014.
6
Advanced Practice Nursing: A Strategy for Achieving Universal Health Coverage and Universal Access to Health.
Rev Lat Am Enfermagem. 2017 Jan 30;25:e2826. doi: 10.1590/1518-8345.1677.2826.
7
[Procedures and methods of benefit assessments for medicines in Germany].
Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2008 Dec;133 Suppl 7:S225-46. doi: 10.1055/s-0028-1100954. Epub 2008 Nov 25.
8
Impact of summer programmes on the outcomes of disadvantaged or 'at risk' young people: A systematic review.
Campbell Syst Rev. 2024 Jun 13;20(2):e1406. doi: 10.1002/cl2.1406. eCollection 2024 Jun.
9
10
Procedures and methods of benefit assessments for medicines in Germany.
Eur J Health Econ. 2008 Nov;9 Suppl 1:5-29. doi: 10.1007/s10198-008-0122-5.

引用本文的文献

1
The therapeutic futility paradox: insights from oncological drug litigation in Ecuador.
Front Med (Lausanne). 2025 Mar 14;12:1434524. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2025.1434524. eCollection 2025.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验