OBJECTIVE: Identify and evaluate studies that analyzed characteristics of right-to-health litigation in Brazil, Colombia, and Costa Rica. METHODS: Studies were evaluated that analyzed characteristics of right-to-health litigation identified through a search of PubMed, LILACS, Cochrane Library, and Scirus (April 2012). Two reviewers evaluated the studies. Variables collected were, among others, grounds for litigation, proportion of lawsuits for benefits covered by the health system, and lawsuits on high-cost technologies. RESULTS: Thirty studies were identified (Brazil 19, Colombia 10, and Costa Rica 1). Judgments were frequently in favor of plaintiffs: Colombia (75%-87%), Costa Rica (89.7%), and Brazil (70%-100%). In Colombia, lawsuits were filed for benefits included in the Compulsory Health Plan (range: 41%-69.9%). In Brazil there was considerable variation in the amount of lawsuits between the Exceptional Circumstance Drug Dispensing Program (13%-31%) and basic medicines in the Unified Health System (approximately 50%). Lawsuits on drugs varied as a percentage of all lawsuits (Colombia 11.9%-35.6%, Costa Rica 30.2%, and Brazil 49.6%). A study in Brazil found a statistically significant difference when comparing lawsuits on exceptional drugs versus all other drugs, by social class; and in another study, according to lawsuits from municipalities with better socioeconomic indicators. A concentration of lawsuits on drug prescribing by a limited group of physicians was reported. Prescribing was not always supported by scientific evidence. Another study found that in half of the cases, the cost of legal proceedings was higher than the cost of the services being claimed. CONCLUSIONS: There are similarities in the grounds, nature, and impact of litigation in the context of the countries studied. The studies included show weaknesses of health systems to ensure access to different services as well as in the introduction of new health technologies.
OBJECTIVE: Identify and evaluate studies that analyzed characteristics of right-to-health litigation in Brazil, Colombia, and Costa Rica. METHODS: Studies were evaluated that analyzed characteristics of right-to-health litigation identified through a search of PubMed, LILACS, Cochrane Library, and Scirus (April 2012). Two reviewers evaluated the studies. Variables collected were, among others, grounds for litigation, proportion of lawsuits for benefits covered by the health system, and lawsuits on high-cost technologies. RESULTS: Thirty studies were identified (Brazil 19, Colombia 10, and Costa Rica 1). Judgments were frequently in favor of plaintiffs: Colombia (75%-87%), Costa Rica (89.7%), and Brazil (70%-100%). In Colombia, lawsuits were filed for benefits included in the Compulsory Health Plan (range: 41%-69.9%). In Brazil there was considerable variation in the amount of lawsuits between the Exceptional Circumstance Drug Dispensing Program (13%-31%) and basic medicines in the Unified Health System (approximately 50%). Lawsuits on drugs varied as a percentage of all lawsuits (Colombia 11.9%-35.6%, Costa Rica 30.2%, and Brazil 49.6%). A study in Brazil found a statistically significant difference when comparing lawsuits on exceptional drugs versus all other drugs, by social class; and in another study, according to lawsuits from municipalities with better socioeconomic indicators. A concentration of lawsuits on drug prescribing by a limited group of physicians was reported. Prescribing was not always supported by scientific evidence. Another study found that in half of the cases, the cost of legal proceedings was higher than the cost of the services being claimed. CONCLUSIONS: There are similarities in the grounds, nature, and impact of litigation in the context of the countries studied. The studies included show weaknesses of health systems to ensure access to different services as well as in the introduction of new health technologies.
Authors: Virginia Oliveira Chagas; Mércia Pandolfo Provin; Pedro Augusto Prado Mota; Rafael Alves Guimarães; Rita Goreti Amaral Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2020-02-03 Impact factor: 2.655