The COVID-19 is disproportionally affecting the poor, minorities and a broad range of vulnerable populations, due to its inequitable spread in areas of dense population and limited mitigation capacity due to high prevalence of chronic conditions or poor access to high quality public health and medical care. Moreover, the collateral effects of the pandemic due to the global economic downturn, and social isolation and movement restriction measures, are unequally affecting those in the lowest power strata of societies. To address the challenges to health equity and describe some of the approaches taken by governments and local organizations, we have compiled 13 country case studies from various regions around the world: China,

Resumo: O Brasil reconhece o acesso a medicamentos como parte do direito à saúde e adota políticas públicas para propiciar sua garantia. No entanto, a Política Nacional de Assistência Farmacêutica não tem conseguido atender a essa demanda. Em parte, por isso, tem crescido o recurso ao Poder Judiciário para a obtenção desses medicamentos no país. Com o objetivo de conhecer as características das ações judiciais, realizou-se uma revisão com busca sistemática dos estudos de natureza empírica, publicados entre 1988 e 2014, sobre a judicialização do acesso a medicamentos no Brasil. Os 53 estudos revisados apresentam achados que ajudam a compreender o fenômeno: as liminares são concedidas na quase totalidade dos casos; parcela considerável das ações poderia ter sido evitada caso fossem observadas as alternativas terapêuticas do SUS. Os estudos revisados não permitem afirmar nem negar que os valores gastos com a compra de medicamentos demandados judicialmente comprometam o orçamento do SUS. Enfim, as pesquisas realizadas permitem que se compreenda melhor o fenômeno da judicialização, embora seja recomendável a realização de outros estudos que descrevam características ainda pouco definidas da judicialização do acesso a medicamentos no Brasil. Palavras-chave: judicialização; medicamentos; direito à saúde.

In the recent decades, Brazil has outperformed comparable countries in its progress toward meeting the Millennium Development Goals. Many of these improvements have been driven by investments in health and social policies. In this article, we aim to identify potential impacts of austerity policies in Brazil on the chances of achieving the sustainable development goals (SDGs) and its consequences for population health. Austerity’s anticipated impacts are assessed by analysing the change in federal spending on different budget programmes from 2014 to 2017. We collected budget data made publicly available by the Senate. Among the selected 19 programmes, only 4 had their committed budgets increased, in real terms, between 2014 and 2017. The total amount of extra money committed to these four programmes in 2017, above that committed in 2014, was small (BR$9.7 billion). Of the 15 programmes that had budget cuts in the period from 2014 to 2017, the total decrease amounted to BR$60.2 billion (US$15.3 billion). In addition to the overall large budget reduction, it is noteworthy that the largest proportional reductions were in programmes targeted at more vulnerable populations. In conclusion, it seems clear that the current austerity policies in Brazil will probably damage the population’s health and increase inequities, and that the possibility of meeting SDG targets is lower in 2018 than it was in 2015.

Despite notable scientific and medical advances, broader political, socioeconomic and behavioural factors continue to undercut the response to the COVID-19 pandemic1,2. Here we convened, as part of this Delphi study, a diverse, multidisciplinary panel of 386 academic, health, non-governmental organization, government and other experts in COVID-19 response from 112 countries and territories to recommend specific actions to end this persistent global threat to public health. The panel developed a set of 41 consensus statements and 57 recommendations to governments, health systems, industry and other key stakeholders across six domains: communication; health systems; vaccination; prevention; treatment and care; and inequities. In the wake of nearly three years of fragmented global and national responses, it is instructive to note that three of the highest-ranked recommendations call for the adoption of whole-of-society and whole-of-government approaches1, while maintaining proven prevention measures using a vaccines-plus approach2 that employs a range of public health and financial support measures to complement vaccination. Other recommendations with at least 99% combined agreement advise governments and other stakeholders to improve communication, rebuild public trust and engage communities3 in the management of pandemic responses. The findings of the study, which have been further endorsed by 184 organizations globally, include points of unanimous agreement, as well as six recommendations with >5% disagreement, that provide health and social policy actions to address inadequacies in the pandemic response and help to bring this public health threat to an end.

Background Brazil’s Estratégia Saúde da Família (ESF) is one of the largest and most robustly evaluated primary healthcare programmes of the world, but it could be affected by fiscal austerity measures and by the possible end of the Mais Médicos programme (MMP)—a major intervention to increase primary care doctors in underserved areas. We forecast the impact of alternative scenarios of ESF coverage changes on under-70 mortality from ambulatory care-sensitive conditions (ACSCs) until 2030, the date for achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Method A synthetic cohort of 5507 Brazilian municipalities was created for the period 2017–2030. A municipal-level microsimulation model was developed and validated using longitudinal data and estimates from a previous retrospective study evaluating the effects of municipal ESF coverage on mortality rates. Reductions in ESF coverage, and its effects on ACSC mortality, were forecast based on two probable austerity scenarios, compared with the maintenance of the current coverage or the expansion to 100%. Fixed effects longitudinal regression models were employed to account for secular trends, demographic and socioeconomic changes, healthcare-related variables, and programme duration effects. Results Under austerity scenarios of decreasing ESF coverage with and without the MMP termination, mean ACSC mortality rates would be 8.60% (95% CI 7.03–10.21%; 48,546 excess premature/under-70 deaths along 2017–2030) and 5.80% (95% CI 4.23–7.35%; 27,685 excess premature deaths) higher respectively in 2030 compared to maintaining the current ESF coverage. Comparing decreasing ESF coverage and MMP termination with achieving 100% ESF coverage (Universal Health Coverage scenario) in 2030, mortality rates would be 11.12% higher (95% CI 9.47–12.76%; 83,937 premature deaths). Reductions in ESF coverage would have stronger effects on mortality from infectious diseases and nutritional deficiencies and would disproportionately impact poorer municipalities, with the concentration index for ACSC mortality 11.77% higher (95% CI 0.31–22.32%) and also ending historical declines in racial health inequalities between white and black/pardo Brazilians. Conclusions Reductions in primary healthcare coverage due to austerity measures are likely to be responsible for many avoidable deaths and may preclude achievement of SDGs for health and inequality in Brazil and in other low- and middle-income countries. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12916-019-1316-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Resumo Desde a promulgação da Constituição federal de 1988, o Brasil mudou muito. Na saúde, embora tenham ocorrido avanços importantes, persistem problemas antigos e novos têm surgido. O objetivo maior de assegurar o direito universal à saúde não foi alcançado. Em 2019, realiza-se a 16ª Conferência Nacional de Saúde, momento oportuno para analisar a história, o momento presente e as tendências que se anunciam. Este texto busca contribuir para essa análise, com base nos resultados de estudos sobre a evolução das condições de saúde da população e do sistema de saúde brasileiro nos últimos 30 anos. Identifica o fortalecimento do setor privado e do capital na área da saúde, em detrimento do interesse público e do SUS. Por fim, discute as estratégias de luta pelo direito à saúde necessárias e possíveis no contexto atual.

No abstract

No abstract