Journal of Migration and Health最新文献

Introduction

In Sweden almost one third of the population is born in another country and a large number of the women who do not speak Swedish are of reproductive age. Women migrating from low-income countries have higher risks for poor obstetric outcomes than receiving country-born citizens. INFOR (a Swedish word for “before” or “ahead of”) is an intervention offering language-assisted, individual birth preparation for non-Swedish speaking pregnant women unfamiliar with the maternity care system. The aim of this study was to describe the uptake of care and obstetric outcomes among non-Swedish speaking migrant women attending INFOR.

Methods

A descriptive study of the obstetric outcomes and uptake of care was conducted of the 149 non-Swedish speaking pregnant women who participated in INFOR between 2016 and 2020. The data were accessed retrospectively from the medical record system Obstetrix and the population-based Swedish Pregnancy Registry and analysed descriptively.

Results

Women participating in INFOR originated from 44 countries and spoke 35 different languages. During late pregnancy, 20 percent of the women sought care for decreased fetal movements and 80 percent of the women attended the postpartum visit. While the majority of the participants were offered professional language support during pregnancy, almost none had a professional interpreter present during labour and birth. After birth, 80 percent of the primiparous women were asked to rate their birth experience, but only half of the multiparous women were asked. Further, only half of the primiparous women attending the postpartum visit were asked about their self-rated health.

Conclusion

INFOR may increase uptake of some important aspects of care during pregnancy, birth and postpartum among migrants of diverse backgrounds. The findings raise concerns however about communication support for migrant women, especially during labour and birth. The offer of professional interpreting as part of standard maternity care for women who need it is essential and must be improved in order to provide equitable care for all.

Health of immigrant population changes with time of residence and under the effect of social determinants of health. This study analyses the health status of the immigrant population in the Basque Country according to groups of origin assessing the effect of time of residence on health in the different origin groups considering social and migration-related determinants of health. A cross-sectional study of the immigrant population in the Basque Country using the Foreign Origin Population Survey was conducted. A descriptive analysis is performed of each group of origin and Poisson models are applied. The main variable is self-rated health, and the independent variables are divided into three groups: demographic, socioeconomic and migration-related. For the study, immigrants are divided into six origin groups. Results show that the health and the effects of socioeconomic and migratory variables on health vary according to origin. Immigrants with greater economic difficulties present poorer health, though to different extents and the effects on health of educational level and perception of discrimination differ according to origin. Finally, the relation between time of residence and self-rated health varies according to origin: Colombian, Ecuadorian, Peruvian, Eastern EU and sub-Saharan immigrants living in Spain for 10 or more years report poorer health even when controlling for socioeconomic and migration-related variables, while people from the Maghreb and Asia do not. Therefore, the effects on health of time of residence, living conditions and the migratory experience differ according to migrant group, leading to the importance of analysing the health of immigrants as a heterogeneous group.

Background

In the last decades, there has been a documented increase in the proportion of migrants among homeless people in Europe. While homelessness is associated with psychosis, little is known about the factors associated with psychosis among migrants in this context.

Methods

Our study analyzed data collected in the SAMENTA cross-sectional survey conducted among 859 adult French-speaking homeless people living in the Greater Paris area. We analyzed the prevalence of psychosis and psychotic-like experiences (PLE) and associated factors by migrant status, using bivariate analysis and multivariable logistic regression models.

Results

Our sample comprised 280 natives and 559 migrants in France. Psychosis was significantly more prevalent among natives (21.6 %) than among migrants (7.5 %) (p = 0.003). The total prevalence of PLE was 30.8% (95 % CI: 24.3 – 38.2), and not statistically different between groups (p = 0.215) or sex (p = 0.528). Adverse events over the past year were associated with the increased odds of psychosis in both groups and with PLE among migrants. Sexual abuse during childhood was associated with both outcomes among natives. Among migrants, exposure to war or life-threatening events increased the odds of psychosis and PLE. Increased odds of psychosis were found among migrants who had been living in France for more than 10 years (OR = 3.34, 95 % CI: 1.41–7.93, p = 0.007).

Conclusion

Differences were found in the factors associated with the psychosis continuum by migrant status, they highlight the impact of experiences related to migration. Prospective studies are needed to better understand these underlying pathways.

Background

Despite the Canadian universal healthcare system, new immigrants face a number of challenges in accessing primary healthcare (PHC) services. As immigration to Canada consistently increases, understanding various types of barriers to PHC and how they differ across different sub-groups is critical. We conducted a qualitative study among Nepalese immigrant men to learn from their experience with PHC access to inform healthcare providers, stakeholders, and policymakers to devise feasible approaches to enhancing access to care.

Methods

We undertook a qualitative research approach employing focus groups among a sample of first-generation Nepalese immigrant men who had prior experience with accessing PHC in Canada.

Data collection and analysis

We conducted six focus groups in total with 34 participants (each group comprising 5–7 participants) in their preferred language, Nepalese, or English. Demographic information was collected prior to each focus group. Transcriptions of the discussions were prepared, and thematic analysis was employed in the qualitative data set.

Results

Participants reported experiencing barriers at two stages: before accessing PHC services and after accessing PHC services. The barriers before accessing PHC were long wait time for an appointment with physicians, limited knowledge of own health- and services-related issues, limited service availability hours, cultural differences in health practices, and transportation and work-related challenges. The barriers after accessing PHC were long wait time in the clinic to meet with the physicians at the time of appointment, communication challenges and misunderstandings, high healthcare costs associated with dental and vision care and prescribed medicines, and inappropriate behaviours and practices of doctors and service providers. To our knowledge, this is the first study in Canada which explored barriers faced by Nepalese immigrant men in accessing PHC.

Conclusions

This study identifies barriers to accessing PHC in Canada from a group of immigrant men's perspective. It is important to account for these while making any reforms and adding new care services to the existing healthcare system so that they are equitable for these groups of individuals as well.

Objective

People with different cultural backgrounds can evaluate the appropriateness of direct and indirect support seeking differently. In this study we explored how direct and indirect communication rules for verbal support seeking by patients with diabetes were perceived among Dutch and Surinamese female participants, and whether the appropriateness differed for the ingroup, outgroup and intercultural support seeker-support provider interactions.

Methods

The study applied a 2 (direct versus indirect support seeking) X 2 (Surinamese patient versus Dutch patient) X 2 (Surinamese support provider versus Dutch support provider)-design. Dutch and Surinamese participants (N = 686) were randomly assigned to one of the eight conditions in which they were provided with a depiction of the patient, the direct or indirect request for help, and the help provider. The main outcome was the rated appropriateness of the help-seeking request in the specific context.

Results

The results revealed a significant main effect of communication style: both, Surinamese and Dutch participants evaluated the direct help-seeking as more appropriate compared to indirect help-seeking, independent of patient or provider culture. This effect was particularly strong in participants who scored high on the individual difference in independent self, as shown by a significant interaction.

Discussion

Literature usually identifies that Surinamese and Dutch populations have different cultural backgrounds and values that express themselves in different attitudes, in general more collectivistic and more individualistic, respectively. However, with regard to help seeking preferences the study results did not verify this expectation. These findings underscore the importance of the support providers’ role in assessing and understanding the individuals’ communication style with regard to help-seeking, rather than assuming communication preferences on the basis of cultural background.

Background

Perinatal outcomes are poor among migrant women in vulnerable situations, but little is known about their health preconception. We investigated preconception health inequalities between migrant women in vulnerable situations and non-migrant women.

Methods

This national cross-sectional study used data from the NHS Maternity Services Data Set (MSDS) version 1.5, incorporating NHS maternity services in England. All 652,880 women with an antenatal booking appointment between 1/4/2018 and 31/3/2019 were included. Migration category data were available for 66.2 % (n = 432,022). Odds ratios were calculated comparing preconception indicators among probable migrants in vulnerable situations (English not their first language with complex social factors (CSF)), probable migrants not in vulnerable situations (English not their first language without CSF), probable non-migrants in vulnerable situations (English their first language with CSF) and probable non-migrants not in vulnerable situations (English their first language without CSF). CSF include recent migrants, asylum seekers, refugees, difficulty reading/speaking English; alcohol and/or drugs misuse; aged under 20; and/or experiencing domestic abuse.

Findings

We identified 3.8 % (25,070 women) of the study population as probable migrants in vulnerable situations, 10.2 % (66,783 women) as probable migrants not in vulnerable situations, 5.6 % (36,433 women) as probable non-migrants in vulnerable situations, 46.5 % (303,737 women) as probable non-migrants not in vulnerable situations, and 33.8 % as having missing migration category data. Probable migrants in vulnerable situations (n = 25,070) had over twice the odds of not taking folic acid preconception compared to probable non-migrants not in vulnerable situations (odds ratio 2.15, 95 % confidence interval 2.06–2.25). They had increased odds of previous obstetric complications and being underweight, but lower odds of physical and mental health conditions (apart from diabetes and hepatitis b), smoking and overweight or obesity.

Interpretation

Inequalities exist across many preconception indicators, highlighting opportunities to improve preconception health in this population to reduce health inequalities and improve perinatal and neonatal outcomes.

Funding

Medical Research Council.

Background

Evidence on the sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) of migrants is lacking globally. We describe SRHR healthcare resource use and long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs) prescriptions for migrant versus non-migrant women attending primary care in England (2009–2018).

Methods

This population-based observational cohort study, using Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) GOLD, included females living in England aged 15 to 49. Migration was defined using a validated codelist. Rates per 100 person years at risk (pyar) and adjusted rate ratios (RRs) were measured in migrants versus non-migrants for consultations related to all-causes, six exemplar SRHR outcomes, and LARC prescriptions. Proportions of migrants and non-migrants ever prescribed LARC were calculated.

Findings

There were 25,112,116 consultations across 1,246,353 eligible individuals. 98,214 (7.9 %) individuals were migrants. All-cause consultation rates were lower in migrants versus non-migrants (509 vs 583/100pyar;RR 0.9;95 %CI 0.9–0.9), as were consultations rates for emergency contraception (RR 0.7;95 %CI 0.7–0.7) and cervical screening (RR 0.96;95 %CI 0.95–0.97). Higher rates of consultations were found in migrants for abortion (RR 1.2;95 %CI 1.1–1.2) and management of fertility problems (RR 1.39;95 %CI 1.08–1.79). No significant difference was observed for chlamydia testing and domestic violence. Of 1,205,258 individuals eligible for contraception, the proportion of non-migrants ever prescribed LARC (12.2 %;135,047/1,107,894) was almost double that of migrants (6.91 %;6,728/97,364). Higher copper intrauterine devices prescription rates were found in migrants (RR 1.53;95 %CI 1.45–1.61), whilst hormonal LARC rates were lower for migrants: levonorgestrel intrauterine device (RR 0.63;95 %CI 0.60–0.66), subdermal implant (RR 0.72;95 %CI 0.69–0.75), and progesterone-only injection (RR 0.35;95 %CI 0.34–0.36).

Interpretation

Healthcare resource use differs between migrant and non-migrant women of reproductive age. Opportunities identified for tailored interventions include access to primary care, LARCs, emergency contraception and cervical screening. An inclusive approach to examining health needs is essential to actualise sexual and reproductive health as a human right.

Background

The number of migrants to Greece has increased considerably the last decade. This study assessed the knowledge and attitudes of healthcare personnel (HCP) toward vaccination of newly-arrived children and adolescents in the Aegean islands, a major port of entry of migrants and refugees to Europe.

Methods

The study was conducted from September 2020 to January 2021. All (166) HCP employed in the public health sector of the Aegean islands were invited to participate. A structured questionnaire was used to collect demographic data and data about their knowledge and attitudes toward vaccinations for migrant and refugees.

Results

A total of 120 HCP participated (72 % response rate), including 54 (45 %) physicians, 43 nurses (35.8 %), and 23 health visitors (19.2 %). Sixty-seven (55.8 %) HCP were aware of the national vaccination guidelines. Health visitors had higher rates of knowledge about the national vaccination guidelines, compared with nurses and physicians (87% versus 44,2% and 51,9%; p-value-0.001). Overall, 73 (60.8 %) HCP were aware of vaccinations during the first examination upon arrival. Primary-healthcare physicians were more likely to be aware about the time of vaccine administration compared with hospital-based physicians (74 % versus 50 %; p-value = 0.006). Out of 120 HCP, 45 % knew that vaccination guidelines apply to all newly-arrived migrant and refugees and 65 % that vaccinations are free-of-charge. Overall, 67.5 % of participants supported no serology testing before vaccination, 21.8 % were against free-of-charge vaccinations, and 55 % recommended only priority vaccinations.

Conclusions

There is a need to increase HCP’ awareness and knowledge through training programs and tailored protocols focusing on vaccinations for newly-arrived migrant and refugee children and adolescents in order to promote effective vaccination of this vulnerable population.

In this commentary, we advocate for the wider implementation of integrated care models for NCDs within humanitarian preparedness, response, and resilience efforts. Since experience and evidence on integrated NCD care in humanitarian settings is limited, we discuss potential benefits, key lessons learned from other settings, and lessons from the integration of other conditions that may be useful for stakeholders considering an integrated model of NCD care. We also introduce our ongoing project in North Lebanon as a case example currently undergoing parallel tracks of program implementation and process evaluation that aims to strengthen the evidence base on implementing an integrated NCD care model in a crisis setting.

Introduction

Low-income immigrants who are eligible to participate in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) participate at lower rates compared to non-immigrants. Immigrant households may be more likely to participate in SNAP if they live in areas with policies that integrate them into society and protect them from deportation.

Methods

Data on low-income immigrant households came from the 2019 American Community Survey (N = 87,678). The outcome was whether any household member received SNAP in the previous 12 months. Immigrant policy exposures came from two sources: the State Immigration Policy Resource, which includes 18 immigrant criminalizing and integrating policies, and a database that identified ‘sanctuary policies’ (SP), which we summarized at the county level. Multivariable logistic regression adjusted for person/household-level and area-level confounders.

Results

Living in a jurisdiction with a SP was associated with 21% higher odds of enrolling in SNAP compared to living in a jurisdiction without a SP (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.21, 95% CI=1.11,1.31). Relative to the least immigrant friendly states, living in the most immigrant-friendly states was associated with 16% higher odds of SNAP enrollment (aOR=1.16, 95%CI=1.06–1.28). When SP and state-level immigrant friendly policy environment were cross-classified, SNAP participation was 23% and 26% higher for those living in jurisdictions with one- and both- exposures, respectively, relative to those with neither (aOR 1.23; CI 1.12,1.36; aOR 1.26; CI 1.15,1.37).

Conclusions

Many at high risk of food insecurity – including immigrants and citizens in households with immigrants – are eligible for SNAP but under-enroll. Policies that welcome and safeguard immigrants could reduce under enrollment.