摘要：OBJETIVO: Investigar fatores relacionados ao deferimento de liminares por medicamentos. MÉTODOS: Estudo descritivo retrospectivo dos processos judiciais por medicamentos em Minas Gerais, de outubro de 1999 a 2009. A base de dados, constituída por 6.112 ações judiciais, teve 6.044 com pedido de liminar e 5.167 com requisição de medicamentos. Foram excluídas as ações que continham mais de um beneficiário, totalizando 5.072 ações analisadas. As variáveis deferimento total, parcial e suspensão foram tratadas como dependentes e avaliadas em relação às independentes: processo (ano, tipo de ação, representação judicial, réu, justiça de ajuizamento, tempo de decisão judicial), medicamentos (nível 5 da Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical ) e doença (por capítulo da Classificação Internacional de Doenças. As análises estatísticas foram realizadas pelo teste Qui-quadrado. RESULTADOS: Dentre as 5.072 ações com liminares, 4.184 (82,5%) foram deferidas. O deferimento variou de 95,8% em 2004 a 76,9% em 2008. Quando houve representação judicial, o deferimento superou 80,0%; nas ações sem representação, não ultrapassou 66,9%. Nas ações civis públicas (89,1%) o deferimento foi superior ao verificado em ações ordinárias (82,8%) e nos mandados de segurança (80,1%). A Justiça Federal deferiu apenas 68,6% das liminares, contra 84,8% da Justiça Estadual. Doenças do aparelho digestivo e neoplasias apresentaram deferimento acima de 87,0%, enquanto doenças do sistema nervoso, transtornos mentais e comportamentais e doenças da pele e do tecido celular subcutâneo tiveram deferimento inferior a 78,6% e apresentaram elevada proporção de liminares suspensas (10,9%). Os fármacos paroxetina, somatropina e sulfato ferroso tiveram 100% de deferimento. Escitalopram, diclofenaco de sódio e nortriptilina obtiveram deferimento infe rior a 54,0%. CONCLUSÕES: Há diferença significativa no deferimento das liminares a partir de variáveis processuais e clínicas. Tendências importantes no padrão de atuação judicial foram observadas, particularmente a redução do deferimento ao longo do período.
其他摘要：OBJECTIVE: To investigate the factors related to the granting of preliminary court orders [injunctions] in drug litigations. METHODS: A retrospective descriptive study of drug lawsuits in the State of Minas Gerais, Southeastern Brazil, was conducted from October 1999 to 2009. The database consists of 6,112 lawsuits, out of which 6,044 had motions for injunctions and 5,167 included the requisition of drugs. Those with more than one beneficiary were excluded, which totaled 5,072 examined suits. The variables for complete, partial, and suppressed motions were treated as dependent and assessed in relation to those that were independent – lawsuits (year, type, legal representation, defendant, court in which it was filed, adjudication time), drugs (level five of the anatomical therapeutic chemical classification), and diseases (chapter of the International Classification of Diseases). Statistical analyses were performed using the Chi-square test. RESULTS: Out of the 5,072 lawsuits with injunctions, 4,184 (82.5%) had the injunctions granted. Granting varied from 95.8% of the total lawsuits in 2004 to 76.9% in 2008. Where there was legal representation, granting exceeded 80.0% and in lawsuits without representation, it did not exceed 66.9%. In public civil actions (89.1%), granting was higher relative to ordinary lawsuits (82.8%) and injunctions (80.1%). Federal courts granted only 68.6% of the injunctions, while the state courts granted 84.8%. Diseases of the digestive system and neoplasms received up to 87.0% in granting, while diseases of the nervous system, mental and behavioral disorders, and diseases of the skin and subcutaneous tissue received granting below 78.6% and showed a high proportion of suspended injunctions (10.9%). Injunctions involving paroxetine, somatropin, and ferrous sulfate drugs were all granted, while less than 54.0% of those involving escitalopram, sodium diclofenac, and nortriptyline were granted . CONCLUSIONS: There are significant differences in the granting of injunctions, depending on the procedural and clinical variances. Important trends in the pattern of judicial action were observed, particularly, in the reduced granting [of injunctions] over the period.
