ABSTRACT
This is an opinion-based article that aims to reflect on the antagonism established between the National Policy of Integral Attention to Men's Health (PNAISH) with specific focus on ED (Erectile Dysfunction), directed to access to medication. It is well-known that PNAISH presents objectives that go beyond sexual and reproductive health, especially, even after 13 years of its publication, since there was no incorporation of medications to treat ED within the SUS. This article was developed based on the scenario observed in the daily care of patients who undergo treatment in the Men's Health Outpatient Service of a High-Complexity Hospital. According to this perspective, it is important to emphasize, that the prescription of medications within the SUS should faithfully follow the Rename; as recommended by Decree 7,508, observing the Resolution SS-83 of 2015, in the state of São Paulo. This establishes that the cost of dispensing medications not included in the SUS pharmaceutical assistance protocols, through judicialization, prescribed by a physician in the state health network, may be funded by the institution to which this physician is affiliated.
Trata-se de um artigo embasado em opinião que procura refletir sobre o antagonismo estabelecido entre a Política Nacional de Atenção Integral à Saúde do Homem (PNAISH) com o recorte específico para DE (Disfunção Erétil) direcionado ao acesso de medicamentos. É notório que a PNAISH apresenta objetivos que vão além da saúde sexual e reprodutiva, sobretudo, mesmo após 13 anos de sua publicação, não houve incorporação de medicamentos para tratar DE no âmbito SUS. O artigo foi desenvolvido com base no cenário observado no dia a dia de atendimento aos pacientes que recebem cuidados no Serviço Ambulatorial da Saúde Masculina de um Hospital de Alta Complexidade. Isto por constatar a dificuldade dos médicos em prescreverem medicamentos para DE, por ausência de padronização no contexto SUS. Importante ressaltar, nesta perspectiva, que a prescrição de medicamentos no âmbito SUS deve seguir fidedignamente a Rename; conforme preconiza o Decreto 7.508 e, se atentar à Resolução SS-83 de 2015, vigente no estado de São Paulo. Ela estabelece que o custo da dispensação de medicamentos não contemplados na Rename, por meio da judicialização, prescritos por médico da rede estadual de saúde, poderá ser custeado pela instituição ao qual este esteja vinculado.
Subject(s)
Erectile Dysfunction , Male , Humans , Erectile Dysfunction/drug therapy , Public Health , Brazil , Prescriptions , Pharmaceutical Preparations , Health Services AccessibilityABSTRACT
Resumo Trata-se de um artigo embasado em opinião que procura refletir sobre o antagonismo estabelecido entre a Política Nacional de Atenção Integral à Saúde do Homem (PNAISH) com o recorte específico para DE (Disfunção Erétil) direcionado ao acesso de medicamentos. É notório que a PNAISH apresenta objetivos que vão além da saúde sexual e reprodutiva, sobretudo, mesmo após 13 anos de sua publicação, não houve incorporação de medicamentos para tratar DE no âmbito SUS. O artigo foi desenvolvido com base no cenário observado no dia a dia de atendimento aos pacientes que recebem cuidados no Serviço Ambulatorial da Saúde Masculina de um Hospital de Alta Complexidade. Isto por constatar a dificuldade dos médicos em prescreverem medicamentos para DE, por ausência de padronização no contexto SUS. Importante ressaltar, nesta perspectiva, que a prescrição de medicamentos no âmbito SUS deve seguir fidedignamente a Rename; conforme preconiza o Decreto 7.508 e, se atentar à Resolução SS-83 de 2015, vigente no estado de São Paulo. Ela estabelece que o custo da dispensação de medicamentos não contemplados na Rename, por meio da judicialização, prescritos por médico da rede estadual de saúde, poderá ser custeado pela instituição ao qual este esteja vinculado.
Abstract This is an opinion-based article that aims to reflect on the antagonism established between the National Policy of Integral Attention to Men's Health (PNAISH) with specific focus on ED (Erectile Dysfunction), directed to access to medication. It is well-known that PNAISH presents objectives that go beyond sexual and reproductive health, especially, even after 13 years of its publication, since there was no incorporation of medications to treat ED within the SUS. This article was developed based on the scenario observed in the daily care of patients who undergo treatment in the Men's Health Outpatient Service of a High-Complexity Hospital. According to this perspective, it is important to emphasize, that the prescription of medications within the SUS should faithfully follow the Rename; as recommended by Decree 7,508, observing the Resolution SS-83 of 2015, in the state of São Paulo. This establishes that the cost of dispensing medications not included in the SUS pharmaceutical assistance protocols, through judicialization, prescribed by a physician in the state health network, may be funded by the institution to which this physician is affiliated.
Subject(s)
Erectile Dysfunction , Erectile Dysfunction/epidemiology , Erectile Dysfunction/therapy , Humans , Male , PandemicsABSTRACT
Abdominoscrotal hydrocele is an uncommon condition characterized by an hourglass-shaped scrotal hydrocele with an intra-abdominal component connected by an isthmus within the inguinal canal. We report a rare case of an adult patient with giant abdominoscrotal hydrocele. Despite recent trends toward less invasive treatments, in this case, the surgical approach through an inguinal incision was the better therapeutic option with a satisfactory outcome.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Metabolic changes caused by anxiety can interfere in both the surgery itself and the recovery process. One way to reassure the patient is to clarify how the procedure will be performed and discuss the possible complications. This study aimed to investigate the anxiety level of candidates for radical prostatectomy at a university hospital. METHODS: Thirty-four patients with a diagnosis of prostate cancer were studied prospectively. Data collection involved the administration of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and a radical prostatectomy knowledge test. RESULTS: The results showed that 94.1% of the patients reported having received clarifications from the physician or healthcare team regarding the surgery and 23.5% reported having received information on the probability of a medical error during surgery. The most cited postoperative complications were sexual impotence and urinary incontinence. A significant association was found between the total Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale score and the complications cited (p=0.0004); patients who marked a larger number of possible complications had a higher Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale score. CONCLUSION: The present study demonstrates that the explanations given by the multidisciplinary health team are not achieving their maximum potential in terms of lowering patient anxiety.
Subject(s)
Prostatic Neoplasms , Urinary Incontinence , Anxiety/etiology , Hospitals , Humans , Male , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Prostate , Prostatectomy/adverse effects , Prostatic Neoplasms/surgery , Urinary Incontinence/etiologySubject(s)
Humans , Male , Erectile Dysfunction/therapy , Erectile Dysfunction/epidemiology , PandemicsABSTRACT
Ureteritis cystica is a rare urological disease with an undefined etiology. Despite the benign behavior, the differential diagnosis should be investigated, as other conditions the cause filling defects in the ureters may occur. We present a rare case of a patient with ureteritis cystica whose differential diagnosis was satisfactory.
