Author:
de Castro Mônica Silva Monteiro,da Silva Gabriela Drummond Marques,Figueiredo Iara Veloso Oliveira,de Miranda Wanessa Debôrtoli,Magalhães Júnior Helvécio Miranda,dos Santos Fausto Pereira,de Sousa Rômulo Paes
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Litigation for health care, also known as health judicialization, is frequent in Brazil. It involves recourse to the court system to access health services. The study aimed to evaluate whether cancer patients in Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil, increased their overall survival by increasing access to certain drugs or treatments through litigation, controlling for the effect of demographic and disease-related variables.
Methods
A retrospective cohort study was conducted. Patients with breast, prostate, brain, lung, or colon cancers from 2014 to 2019 were included. Survival analysis was performed using the Cox proportional hazards model.
Results
In the multivariate analysis, litigation was significantly associated with increased survival in cancers of breast (HR = 0.51, 95%CI 0.33–0.80), prostate (HR = 0.50, 95%CI 0.30–0.85), colon (HR = 0.59, 95%CI 0.38–0.93), and lung (HR = 0.36, 95%CI 0.22–0.60). Five-year survival rates of patients who sued for treatment were 97.8%, 88.7%, 59.3%, and 26.0%, compared to median survival of 95.7%, 78.7%, 41.2%, and 2.4%, respectively, among patient that did not resort to court action. The study suggests that litigation for access to cancer treatment may represent a step forward in obtaining more effective treatment. This study´s main limitations are the lack of patients´ clinical information for use as control variables and the lack of variables to assess patients´ quality of life. The study also found that many cases involved claims that could have been solved by administrative rather than legal action. Some claims thus reflect the lack of adequate administrative procedures.
Conclusion
When based on scientific evidence, access to new therapies, combined with other technologies already available, can favor patient survival. Access to new therapies through litigation may increase health inequalities since low-income patients have limited access to legal recourse against the State to meet their needs. The timely approval of new effective therapies can mitigate the judicialization of cancer treatment.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
Reference54 articles.
1. Gauri V, Brinks DM. Courting Social Justice judicial enforcement of social and economic rights in the developing World. Cambridge University Press. 2008;10(2):351–4.
2. Castro MC, et al. Brazil’s unified health system: the first 30 years and prospects for the future. Lanceta. 2019;394(10195):345–56.
3. BRASIL, Lei nº 8.142, de 28 de dezembro de 1990a. Dispõe sobre a participação da comunidade na gestão do Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS) e sobre as transferências intergovernamentais de recursos financeiros na área da saúde e dá outras providências. Diário Oficial da União. 28 dez. 1990. 30/12/21. Available at: http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/L8142.htm.
4. BRASIL. Lei no 8.080, de 19 de setembro de 1990b. Dispõe sobre as condições para a promoção, proteção e recuperação da saúde, a organização e o funcionamento dos serviços correspondentes e dá outras providências. Diário Oficial da União. 20 set. 1990. 30/12/21. Available at: http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/L8080.htm.
5. BRASIL. Constituição (1988). Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil. 15/12/22 Avaliable at: http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/constituicao/constituicaocompilado.htm.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献