基层医疗环境恶劣:对基层医疗机构医护人员横断面调查的定性分析

IF 3.9 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Journal of Migration and Health Pub Date : 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1016/j.jmh.2024.100276
Joanna Dobbin , Francesca Burns , Sebastian Casalotti , Mariam Jaffer , Monica Sharman , Catarina Soares , Josie Reynolds
{"title":"基层医疗环境恶劣:对基层医疗机构医护人员横断面调查的定性分析","authors":"Joanna Dobbin ,&nbsp;Francesca Burns ,&nbsp;Sebastian Casalotti ,&nbsp;Mariam Jaffer ,&nbsp;Monica Sharman ,&nbsp;Catarina Soares ,&nbsp;Josie Reynolds","doi":"10.1016/j.jmh.2024.100276","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>In 2014 the UK government rolled out the then called hostile environment as a series of punitive policies designed to disenfranchise undocumented migrants from living in Britain. As part of these measures upfront charging was introduced in 2017 which saw patients being denied treatment without prior full payment based on their immigration status.</div></div><div><h3>Aim</h3><div>Assess the knowledge of the charging regulations in a sample of primary care practitioners. Assess the impact of the regulations on both patients and practitioners in a primary care setting.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Building on a previous survey by the RCPCH, a cross sectional survey was circulated through the RCGP faculties and GP training groups within England. Demographic information and likert responses were collected from over 300 responses. Thematic analysis of over 120 white space questions was undertaken to create themes and sub-themes.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Results showed an overall poor knowledge of the regulations. Thematic analysis was split into two main categories, (i) human impact of the policies and (ii) the economic and political impact of the policies. Key points were (i) lack of knowledge and awareness of the regulations, (ii) evidence of patient harm through patients’ being denied care, avoiding care or having care delayed, (iii) evidence of clinician harm through burnout, stress, a loss of faith in practice and concerns over extra work and (iv) concerns over implicit bias and structural racism within primary care and (v) concerns over lack of economic analysis.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Charging of overseas visitors is poorly understood within primary care despite having an impact on both patients and practitioners within this setting. Recommendations to help tackle this issue and reduce harm include training of staff, systematic reporting of harm, and a system wide economic analysis.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":34448,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Migration and Health","volume":"10 ","pages":"Article 100276"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The hostile environment in primary care: Qualitative analysis of a cross sectional survey of health care professionals in primary care\",\"authors\":\"Joanna Dobbin ,&nbsp;Francesca Burns ,&nbsp;Sebastian Casalotti ,&nbsp;Mariam Jaffer ,&nbsp;Monica Sharman ,&nbsp;Catarina Soares ,&nbsp;Josie Reynolds\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jmh.2024.100276\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>In 2014 the UK government rolled out the then called hostile environment as a series of punitive policies designed to disenfranchise undocumented migrants from living in Britain. As part of these measures upfront charging was introduced in 2017 which saw patients being denied treatment without prior full payment based on their immigration status.</div></div><div><h3>Aim</h3><div>Assess the knowledge of the charging regulations in a sample of primary care practitioners. Assess the impact of the regulations on both patients and practitioners in a primary care setting.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Building on a previous survey by the RCPCH, a cross sectional survey was circulated through the RCGP faculties and GP training groups within England. Demographic information and likert responses were collected from over 300 responses. Thematic analysis of over 120 white space questions was undertaken to create themes and sub-themes.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Results showed an overall poor knowledge of the regulations. Thematic analysis was split into two main categories, (i) human impact of the policies and (ii) the economic and political impact of the policies. Key points were (i) lack of knowledge and awareness of the regulations, (ii) evidence of patient harm through patients’ being denied care, avoiding care or having care delayed, (iii) evidence of clinician harm through burnout, stress, a loss of faith in practice and concerns over extra work and (iv) concerns over implicit bias and structural racism within primary care and (v) concerns over lack of economic analysis.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Charging of overseas visitors is poorly understood within primary care despite having an impact on both patients and practitioners within this setting. Recommendations to help tackle this issue and reduce harm include training of staff, systematic reporting of harm, and a system wide economic analysis.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":34448,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Migration and Health\",\"volume\":\"10 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100276\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Migration and Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666623524000655\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Migration and Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666623524000655","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

摘要

背景2014年,英国政府推出了当时被称为 "敌对环境 "的一系列惩罚性政策,旨在剥夺无证移民在英国生活的权利。作为这些措施的一部分,2017 年推出了预付费政策,规定患者在未事先全额付款的情况下,不得以其移民身份为由接受治疗。评估该法规对初级医疗机构中的患者和从业人员的影响。方法在英国皇家初级保健委员会先前调查的基础上,通过英国皇家初级保健委员会的学院和全科医生培训小组分发了一份横断面调查。从 300 多份回复中收集了人口统计信息和利特回答。对 120 多个留白问题进行了主题分析,以创建主题和次主题。专题分析分为两大类:(i) 政策对人的影响和 (ii) 政策对经济和政治的影响。要点包括:(i) 缺乏对法规的了解和认识;(ii) 有证据表明,患者因被拒绝治疗、避免治疗或治疗延误而受到伤害;(iii) 有证据表明,临床医生因职业倦怠、压力、对实践失去信心以及对额外工作的担忧而受到伤害;(iv) 对初级医疗中的隐性偏见和结构性种族主义的担忧;(v) 对缺乏经济分析的担忧。帮助解决这一问题并减少伤害的建议包括培训员工、系统性地报告伤害情况以及进行全系统的经济分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The hostile environment in primary care: Qualitative analysis of a cross sectional survey of health care professionals in primary care

Background

In 2014 the UK government rolled out the then called hostile environment as a series of punitive policies designed to disenfranchise undocumented migrants from living in Britain. As part of these measures upfront charging was introduced in 2017 which saw patients being denied treatment without prior full payment based on their immigration status.

Aim

Assess the knowledge of the charging regulations in a sample of primary care practitioners. Assess the impact of the regulations on both patients and practitioners in a primary care setting.

Methods

Building on a previous survey by the RCPCH, a cross sectional survey was circulated through the RCGP faculties and GP training groups within England. Demographic information and likert responses were collected from over 300 responses. Thematic analysis of over 120 white space questions was undertaken to create themes and sub-themes.

Results

Results showed an overall poor knowledge of the regulations. Thematic analysis was split into two main categories, (i) human impact of the policies and (ii) the economic and political impact of the policies. Key points were (i) lack of knowledge and awareness of the regulations, (ii) evidence of patient harm through patients’ being denied care, avoiding care or having care delayed, (iii) evidence of clinician harm through burnout, stress, a loss of faith in practice and concerns over extra work and (iv) concerns over implicit bias and structural racism within primary care and (v) concerns over lack of economic analysis.

Conclusion

Charging of overseas visitors is poorly understood within primary care despite having an impact on both patients and practitioners within this setting. Recommendations to help tackle this issue and reduce harm include training of staff, systematic reporting of harm, and a system wide economic analysis.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Migration and Health
Journal of Migration and Health Social Sciences-Sociology and Political Science
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
8.70%
发文量
65
审稿时长
153 days
期刊最新文献
Social connections related to health and well-being needs identified by children and adolescents affected by displacement in Lebanon: a participatory research study Violence Against Women and its Effects on Mental Health and Quality of Life: A Study of Myanmar Migrant Workers in Central Thailand Everyday discrimination, co-ethnic social support and mood changes in young adult immigrants in Germany–Evidence from an ecological momentary assessment study Factors contributing to the mental wellbeing of Afghan migrants in Iran during the COVID-19 pandemic Exploring the impact of preconception care and unintended pregnancy on access to antenatal healthcare services among Rohingya women: Insights from a cross-sectional survey
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1