PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
UNASSIGNED: Brazil\'s Unified Health System (SUS) ensures universal, equitable, and excellent quality health coverage for all. The broad right to health, supported by the Constitution, has led to excessive litigation in the public sector. This has negatively impacted the financial stability of SUS, created inequality in children and adolescents\' access to healthcare, and affected communication between the healthcare system and the judiciary. The enactment of Law Number 13.655 on 25 April 2018, proposed significant changes in judicial decisions. This study aimed to investigate decision-making changes in health litigation involving children and adolescents following the implementation of the new normative model.
UNASSIGNED: The study is cross-sectional, analyzing 3753 national judgment documents from all State Courts of Brazil, available on their respective websites from 2014 to 2020. It compares regional legal decisions before and after the promulgation of Law Number 13.655/2018. Data tabulation, statistical analysis, textual analysis, coding, and counting of significant units in the collected documents were performed. The results of data cross-referencing are presented in tables and diagrams.
UNASSIGNED: The majority (96.86%) of legal claims (3635 cases) received partial or total provision of what was prescribed by the physician. The Judiciary predominantly handled these cases individually. The analysis indicates that the decisions made did not adhere to the norms established in 2018.
UNASSIGNED: Regional heterogeneity in health litigation was observed, and there was no significant variability in decisions during the studied period, even after the implementation of the new normative paradigm in 2018. Technical-scientific support was undervalued by the magistrates. Prioritizing litigants undermines equity in access to Universal Health Coverage for children and adolescents.
UNASSIGNED: The study is cross-sectional, analyzing 3753 national judgment documents from all State Courts of Brazil, available on their respective websites from 2014 to 2020. It compares regional legal decisions before and after the promulgation of Law Number 13.655/2018. Data tabulation, statistical analysis, textual analysis, coding, and counting of significant units in the collected documents were performed. The results of data cross-referencing are presented in tables and diagrams.
UNASSIGNED: The majority (96.86%) of legal claims (3635 cases) received partial or total provision of what was prescribed by the physician. The Judiciary predominantly handled these cases individually. The analysis indicates that the decisions made did not adhere to the norms established in 2018.
UNASSIGNED: Regional heterogeneity in health litigation was observed, and there was no significant variability in decisions during the studied period, even after the implementation of the new normative paradigm in 2018. Technical-scientific support was undervalued by the magistrates. Prioritizing litigants undermines equity in access to Universal Health Coverage for children and adolescents.
摘要：
■巴西的统一卫生系统（SUS）确保普及，公平,为所有人提供优质的健康保险。广泛的健康权，在宪法的支持下,导致公共部门的过度诉讼。这对SUS的金融稳定产生了负面影响，造成儿童和青少年获得医疗保健的不平等，影响了医疗系统和司法机构之间的沟通。2018年4月25日颁布的第13.655号法律对司法裁决提出了重大修改。本研究旨在调查新规范模式实施后涉及儿童和青少年的健康诉讼决策变化。
■这项研究是横断面的，分析来自巴西所有州法院的3753份国家判决文件，从2014年到2020年在各自的网站上提供。它比较了2018年第13.655号法律颁布前后的区域法律决定。数据制表，统计分析,文本分析，编码,并对收集的文件中的重要单位进行计数。数据交叉引用的结果显示在表格和图表中。
■大多数（96.86％）的法律索赔（3635例）接受了医生处方的部分或全部规定。司法机构主要单独处理这些案件。分析表明，做出的决定不符合2018年制定的规范。
■观察到卫生诉讼中的区域异质性，在研究期间，决策没有显著的可变性，即使在2018年新的规范范式实施之后。治安法官低估了技术-科学支持。优先考虑诉讼人损害了儿童和青少年在获得全民健康保险方面的公平性。
■这项研究是横断面的，分析来自巴西所有州法院的3753份国家判决文件，从2014年到2020年在各自的网站上提供。它比较了2018年第13.655号法律颁布前后的区域法律决定。数据制表，统计分析,文本分析，编码,并对收集的文件中的重要单位进行计数。数据交叉引用的结果显示在表格和图表中。
■大多数（96.86％）的法律索赔（3635例）接受了医生处方的部分或全部规定。司法机构主要单独处理这些案件。分析表明，做出的决定不符合2018年制定的规范。
■观察到卫生诉讼中的区域异质性，在研究期间，决策没有显著的可变性，即使在2018年新的规范范式实施之后。治安法官低估了技术-科学支持。优先考虑诉讼人损害了儿童和青少年在获得全民健康保险方面的公平性。
