ABSTRACT
Judicialization in supplementary health surpasses that which occurs in the public sector, evidencing the fragility of its regulation and making access to health plans difficult. Lawsuits against a Supplementary Health operator in Belo Horizonte, between 2010 and 2017, will be analyzed. Legal proceedings were analyzed using a document analysis technique. Variables were related to the nature of the legal process, the profile of the beneficiaries and the characteristics of the demands. Poisson Regression was used to assess the impact and relevance of the selected variables, and the R software version 3.6.1 for the significance tests. In the period from 2010 to 2017, 6090 actions were filed. The main causes are contractual issues, denial of procedure, orthosis/prosthesis and exams. Plans prior to the ‘Health Plan Law’, correspond to 3% of the portfolio and 37.4% of the judicialization. This study showed that the possibility of taking legal action is greater among male clients, individual contracts, plans assisted in a wide network, without co-participation. Judicialization is more accessible to citizens of higher economic status. Contractual issues show fragile regulation. Adequate regulation reduces the imbalance between customers and operators. The National Supplementary Health Agency needs to exercise its regulatory function.
KEYWORDS
Health judicialization; Supplemental health; Private sector; Health systems plan