Desinvestimento de tecnologias em saúde no Sistema Único de Saúde: um perfil no período 2012-2022

• Autor(a) principal: Fernandes, Bárbara da Silva
• Data de Publicação: 2023
• Outros Autores: [e-mail]
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da UERJ
• Texto Completo: http://www.bdtd.uerj.br/handle/1/19347
• topic: Brazilian public health; Disinvestment; Drugs; Health technology assessment; Resources reallocation; Avaliação de tecnologias em saúde; Desinvestimento; Medicamentos; Sistema Único de Saúde; Tomada de decisão; CIENCIAS DA SAUDE::SAUDE COLETIVA

Disinvestment refers to withdrawing resources from interventions that offer little or no health gain compared to their cost, seeking to reinforce practices proven to be safe, effective or more cost-effective and to optimize health outcomes and the economic sustainability of health systems. This study aimed to characterize the drug divestment process conducted by the National Commission for Incorporation of Technologies (CONITEC) in the Brazilian Unified Health System (SUS) between 2012 and 2022, in an exploratory way through their the technical recommendations reports. Drug name and ATC classification, clinical indication, proponents, occurrence of Public Consultation, recommended divestment modality and justifications for disinvestment were evaluated. We also evaluated the agreement of treatment guidelines with disinvestment decisions and the sanitary registration status of technologies disinvested at different times. We evaluated 30 recommendations reports corresponding to 90 drugs. Three reports recommended the maintenance of seven technologies in SUS. Another three reports referred to technologies that were incorporated under the ad experimentum modality and then were reassessed after three years in SUS. As for the technologies effectively disinvested (80), the drugs mainly belonged to the ATC classes L (29.3%), J (21.3%) and A (20%). The main clinical indications of the disinvested drugs were: rheumatoid arthritis, HIV, hepatitis C, and Crohn's disease. The main justifications were absence of market approval for the drug in Brazil (24.1%) and problems related to safety (20.6%) and effectiveness (19.9%). All requests were from the Brazilian Ministry of Health. Public Consultation was carried out in 36% of the situations. There were recommendations to exclude the drug for a specific indication in 31.3% of the cases and total exclusion from the SUS in 30%; exclusion of a particular pharmaceutical presentation and exclusion of presentation for a specific indication occurred in 27.5% and 10%, respectively. After the publication of the Methodological Guideline for Performance Avaliation of Health Technologies ate the end of 2016, the profile of drugs disinvested by ATC category and by clinical indications acquired bigger diversity; the justifications for disinvestment, which previously focused on issues related to effectiveness and safety, passed to focus on the unavailability of the drug on the market; disinvestment modalities concentrated more on SUS exclusions and presentation exclusions; the Secretaria of Science, Technology, Innovation and Strategic Insums became the main proponent of disinvestment demands; submission to public consultations grow up from 11.9% to 86.8%. The maximum structural adequacy identified of the reports in relation to the topics recommended by the Guideline was 46,2%. The lack of standardization and overly simplified reporting formats stood out. Although divestment initiatives have advanced in recent years, this theme still needs to improve in establishing a solid agenda in Brazil.