Impact on and use of an inner-city London Infectious Diseases Department by international migrants: a questionnaire survey

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The UK has witnessed a considerable increase in immigration in the past decade. Migrant may face barriers to accessing appropriate health care on arrival and the current focus on screening certain migrants for tuberculosis on arrival is considered inadequate. We assessed the implications for an inner-city London Infectious Diseases Department in a high migrant area.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We administered an anonymous 20-point questionnaire survey to all admitted patients during a 6 week period. Questions related to sociodemographic characteristics and clinical presentation. Analysis was by migration status (UK born <it>vs </it>overseas born).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>111 of 133 patients completed the survey (response rate 83.4%). 58 (52.2%) were born in the UK; 53 (47.7%) of the cohort were overseas born. Overseas-born were over-represented in comparison to Census data for this survey site (47.7% <it>vs </it>33.6%; proportional difference 0.142 [95% CI 0.049–0.235]; p = 0.002): overseas born reported 33 different countries of birth, most (73.6%) of whom arrived in the UK pre-1975 and self-reported their nationality as British. A smaller number (26.4%) were new migrants to the UK (≤10 years), mostly refugees/asylum seekers. Overseas-born patients presented with a broad range and more severe spectrum of infections, differing from the UK-born population, resulting in two deaths in this group only. Presentation with a primary infection was associated with refugee/asylum status (n = 8; OR 6.35 [95% CI 1.28–31.50]; p = 0.023), being a new migrant (12; 10.62 [2.24–50.23]; p = 0.003), and being overseas born (31; 3.69 [1.67–8.18]; p = 0.001). Not having registered with a primary-care physician was associated with being overseas born, being a refugee/asylum seeker, being a new migrant, not having English as a first language, and being in the UK for ≤5 years. No significant differences were found between groups in terms of duration of illness prior to presentation or duration of hospitalisation (mean 11.74 days [SD 12.69]).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Migrants presented with a range of more severe infections, which suggests they face barriers to accessing appropriate health care and screening both on arrival and once settled through primary care services. A more organised and holistic approach to migrant health care is required.</p

Infection control, genetic assessment of drug resistance and drug susceptibility testing in the current management of multidrug/extensively-resistant tuberculosis (M/XDR-TB) in Europe: A tuberculosis network European Trialsgroup (TBNET) study

Aim Europe has the highest documented caseload and greatest increase in multidrug and extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis (M/XDR-TB) of all World Health Organization (WHO) regions. This survey examines how recommendations for M/XDR-TB management are being implemented. Methods TBNET is a pan-European clinical research collaboration for tuberculosis. An email survey of TBNET members collected data in relation to infection control, access to molecular tests and basic microbiology with drug sensitivity testing. Results 68/105 responses gave valid information and were from countries within the WHO European Region. Inpatient beds matched demand, but single rooms with negative pressure were only available in low incidence countries; ultraviolet decontamination was used in 5 sites, all with &gt;10 patients with M/XDR-TB per year. Molecular tests for mutations associated with rifampicin resistance were widely available (88%), even in lower income and especially in high incidence countries. Molecular tests for other first line and second line drugs were less accessible (76 and 52% respectively). A third of physicians considered that drug susceptibility results were delayed by &gt; 2 months. Conclusion Infection control for inpatients with M/XDR-TB remains a problem in high incidence countries. Rifampicin resistance is readily detected, but tests to plan regimens tailored to the drug susceptibilities of the strain of Mycobacterium tuberculosis are significantly delayed, allowing for further drug resistance to develop

The impact of migration on tuberculosis epidemiology and control in high-income countries: a review.

Tuberculosis (TB) causes significant morbidity and mortality in high-income countries with foreign-born individuals bearing a disproportionate burden of the overall TB case burden in these countries. In this review of tuberculosis and migration we discuss the impact of migration on the epidemiology of TB in low burden countries, describe the various screening strategies to address this issue, review the yield and cost-effectiveness of these programs and describe the gaps in knowledge as well as possible future solutions.The reasons for the TB burden in the migrant population are likely to be the reactivation of remotely-acquired latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) following migration from low/intermediate-income high TB burden settings to high-income, low TB burden countries.TB control in high-income countries has historically focused on the early identification and treatment of active TB with accompanying contact-tracing. In the face of the TB case-load in migrant populations, however, there is ongoing discussion about how best to identify TB in migrant populations. In general, countries have generally focused on two methods: identification of active TB (either at/post-arrival or increasingly pre-arrival in countries of origin) and secondly, conditionally supported by WHO guidance, through identifying LTBI in migrants from high TB burden countries. Although health-economic analyses have shown that TB control in high income settings would benefit from providing targeted LTBI screening and treatment to certain migrants from high TB burden countries, implementation issues and barriers such as sub-optimal treatment completion will need to be addressed to ensure program efficacy