Notes for the study on health systems: multifaceted analysis and tracer indicators

The resilience of the Brazilian Unified Health System is not (only) in responding to disasters

Coping with the recent COVID-19 pandemic has shown that the Brazilian Unified Health System (SUS) needs to improve its resilience to handle the rapid spread of communicable diseases while ensuring the necessary care for an aging population with comorbidities and in a vulnerable situation. This article identifies, analyzes, and discusses critical aspects of the resilience of the SUS, calling into question the prevailing focus on the robustness and volume of resources mobilized during the outbreak of major disasters. Recent studies demonstrate that the skills that favor adaptation to unexpected situations emerge from the daily functioning of organizations. Restricting the discussion to the mobilization of structures to respond to adverse events has the effect of limiting their potential, inhibiting the emergence of the transformative, adaptive, anticipatory, and learning skills necessary for the sustainable development of resilience.

[Mental healthcare in Brazil: a multifaceted study in four large cities]

This study aimed to assess characteristics of healthcare networks in four large Brazilian cities (Campinas, Fortaleza, Porto Alegre, and São Paulo), in the provision of mental healthcare. The following outcomes were used: (i) place of identification of the mental health problem; (ii) mental healthcare in primary care; (iii) pharmaceutical care in mental health; and (iv) social rehabilitation. This is a mixed-methods study with a concurrent and sequential approach, conducted with 10 administrators and 1,642 users of Centers for Psychosocial Care (CAPS, in Portuguese) in the four cities. The study showed the persistence of high-complexity services such as hospitals as the site for initial identification of mental health problems in Campinas (40% of users) and Fortaleza (37%); low proportion of mental health treatment in primary care (Fortaleza, 23%); differences between cities in psychotropic medication prescription in primary care (Porto Alegre, 68%; São Paulo, 64%; Campinas, 39%; Fortaleza, 31%) and in shortages of prescribed medication (higher in Fortaleza, 58%; lower in Campinas, 28%); and overall frailty in enabling return to work (lower in São Paulo, 17%; higher in Campinas, 39%), with better overall results regarding religion and leisure activities (higher in São Paulo, 53% and 56%, respectively). The study contributes to the discussion of the Brazilian scenario of mental healthcare, with evidence of persistent inequalities in the national context, pointing to gaps in some mental healthcare network configurations with the potential for better performance and longitudinal follow-up.