Ana Hagström , Henna Hasson , Anna-Clara Hollander , Carl Vahtra , Sara Delilovic , Hanna Augustsson
{"title":"“Sometimes it can be like an icebreaker”: A mixed method evaluation of the implementation of the Refugee Health Screener-13 (RHS-13)","authors":"Ana Hagström , Henna Hasson , Anna-Clara Hollander , Carl Vahtra , Sara Delilovic , Hanna Augustsson","doi":"10.1016/j.jmh.2024.100243","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Forced migrants are at risk of developing mental illness, yet challenges remain with underutilization of mental healthcare among this population. This study examined the implementation of the Refugee Health Screener-13 (RHS-13) in the health assessment for forced migrants in eight primary health care centres in Stockholm Region, Sweden.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A mixed-methods convergent parallel design was used, combining nurses self-reported quantitative data on the levels and reasons for RHS-13 use in the health assessment with qualitative interview data on the barriers and facilitators for RHS-13 use. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) was used as a coding framework for the qualitative analysis.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Levels of RHS-13 use varied between primary health care centres, resulting in two groups: three centres with high-level (65–92%) and five centres with low-level (0–36%) implementation. Factors related to the tool itself, as well as the inner and outer context, influenced the use of RHS-13. Language barriers, insufficient time, and lack of trust in the validity and utility of RHS-13 were the main barriers, while its availability in many languages and that it was perceived as an important complement to the health assessment were the main facilitators.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>RHS-13 contributes to the standardization of assessing mental health in the health assessment. Identifying context-based implementation strategies and addressing language and time issues as well as nurses trust in the tool's utility are recommended to enhance the use of RHS-13.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":34448,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Migration and Health","volume":"10 ","pages":"Article 100243"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666623524000321/pdfft?md5=0229f441ddf971c562a651826f4dd247&pid=1-s2.0-S2666623524000321-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Migration and Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666623524000321","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Forced migrants are at risk of developing mental illness, yet challenges remain with underutilization of mental healthcare among this population. This study examined the implementation of the Refugee Health Screener-13 (RHS-13) in the health assessment for forced migrants in eight primary health care centres in Stockholm Region, Sweden.
Methods
A mixed-methods convergent parallel design was used, combining nurses self-reported quantitative data on the levels and reasons for RHS-13 use in the health assessment with qualitative interview data on the barriers and facilitators for RHS-13 use. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) was used as a coding framework for the qualitative analysis.
Results
Levels of RHS-13 use varied between primary health care centres, resulting in two groups: three centres with high-level (65–92%) and five centres with low-level (0–36%) implementation. Factors related to the tool itself, as well as the inner and outer context, influenced the use of RHS-13. Language barriers, insufficient time, and lack of trust in the validity and utility of RHS-13 were the main barriers, while its availability in many languages and that it was perceived as an important complement to the health assessment were the main facilitators.
Conclusion
RHS-13 contributes to the standardization of assessing mental health in the health assessment. Identifying context-based implementation strategies and addressing language and time issues as well as nurses trust in the tool's utility are recommended to enhance the use of RHS-13.