Evidences and gaps in scientific production on SUS managers: scoping review

Abstract

Introduction: We hypothesized that there are gaps in knowledge about the managers of the Unified Health System (SUS) and that the term manager is used to designate different actors. Objective: To map the scientific production and synthesize the evidence on SUS managers from a scoping review. Method: Scoping review guided by PRISMA-ScR. The 'population, concept, context' approach was followed to formulate the research question: What are the characteristics of publications and the main scientific evidence on SUS managers? Studies were searched in scientific literature bases from the combination of 53 terms. Selection was performed by reading titles, abstracts, and methods, followed by full analytical reading. The data were submitted to the usual techniques of descriptive statistical analysis and content analysis. Results: 51 publications were analyzed. There was a predominance of qualitative studies carried out with municipal managers in the South and Southeast regions. Evidence was found on the profile, attributions, and attributes of the manager and, to a lesser extent, on the perceptions of managers about their role. Conclusions: There were different uses of the term manager, a reduced number of studies that take SUS managers as the focus of analysis, and scarcity of evidence on state and federal managers. The scoping review proved to be a useful and rigorous method for mapping evidence and identifying gaps in knowledge.