cross-sectional study

Objective: Research on health services for immigrants has mostly been concerned with access barriers but rarely with appropriateness and responsiveness of care. We assessed whether appropriateness and responsiveness of care depend on migration status, using provision of neuraxial anaesthesia (NA) during labour as indicator. In relation to their migration status, we analysed whether (1) women undergoing elective or secondary/urgent secondary caesarean sections (ESCS) appropriately receive NA (instead of general anaesthesia), (2) women delivering vaginally appropriately receive NA and (3) women objecting to NA, for example, for religious reasons, may deliver vaginally without receiving NA (provider responsiveness). Design: Cross- sectional study. Setting: Three obstetric hospitals in Berlin, Germany. Methods: Questionnaire survey covering 6391 women with migration history (first and second generations) and non-immigrant women giving birth; data linkage with routine obstetric data. We assessed the effects of migrant status, German language proficiency, religion and education on the provision of NA (primary outcome) after adjusting for other maternal and obstetric parameters. Results: The chance of receiving NA for elective/ESCS was independent of migrant status after controlling for confounding variables (adjusted OR (aOR) 0.93, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.33). In vaginal deliveries, first (but not second) generation women (aOR 0.79, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.95), women with low German language skills (aOR 0.77, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.99) and women with low educational attainment (aOR 0.62, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.82) had lower chances of receiving NA; there was no evidence of overprovision among women with strong affinity to Islam (aOR 0.77, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.94). Conclusions: We found evidence for underprovision of care among first-generation immigrants, among women with low German language proficiency and particularly among all women with low educational attainment, irrespective of migration status. There was no evidence for overprovision of care to immigrant women, either inappropriately (general anaesthesia for ESCS) or because of low provider responsiveness (no opt-out for NA in vaginal delivery)

Recommendations for collecting and analysing migration-related determinants in public health research

Background: According to the definition of the German Federal Statistical Office, about every fourth person living in Germany has a so-called migration background (MB), i.e., the person or at least one of their parents was born without German citizenship. However, MB has been defined differently in many studies. Also, the MB summarises people in different living situations, making differentiated analysis in health science more difficult. This article formulates recommendations for the collection and analysis of migration-related, as well as social and structural, determinants of health. Indicators for capturing relevant determinants of health: As part of the Improving Health Monitoring in Migrant Populations project (IMIRA), the previous approaches to operationalise and measure migration-related determinants were revised based on literature research and exchange formats, such as workshops, meetings, congress contributions, etc. Instead of MB, the country of birth of the respondents and their parents, duration of residence, citizenship(s), residence status, and German language proficiency should be recorded as minimum indicators and analysed as individual variables. Further social and structural determinants, such as socioeconomic position, working and housing conditions, or self-reported discrimination, should be included. Conclusions: In order to describe health inequalities and to specifically identify the needs of people with a history of migration, a mutual and differentiated consideration of migration-related and social determinants of health is essential

Advanced cervical dilatation as a predictor for low emergency cesarean delivery: a comparison between migrant and non-migrant Primiparae – secondary analysis in Berlin, Germany

Breckenkamp J, Läcke EM, Henrich W, et al. Advanced cervical dilatation as a predictor for low emergency cesarean delivery: a comparison between migrant and non-migrant Primiparae – secondary analysis in Berlin, Germany. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth. 2019;19(1): 1.Background Cesarean rates are higher in women admitted to labor ward during early stages rather than at later stages of labor. In a study in Germany, crude cesarean rates among Turkish and Lebanese immigrant women were low compared to non-immigrant women. We evaluated whether these immigrant women were admitted during later stages of labor, and if so, whether this explains their lower cesarean rates. Methods We enrolled 1413 nulliparous women with vertex pregnancies, singleton birth, and 37+ week of gestation, excluding elective cesarean deliveries, in three Berlin obstetric hospitals. We applied binary logistic regression to adjust for social and obstetric factors; and standardized coefficients to rank predictors derived from the regression model. Results At the time of admission to labor ward, a smaller proportion of Turkish migrant women was in the active phase of labor (cervical dilation: 4+ cm), compared to women of Lebanese origin and non-immigrant women. Rates of cesarean deliveries were lower in women of Turkish and Lebanese origin (15.8 and 13.9%) than in non-immigrant women (23.9%). In the logistic regression analysis, more advanced cervical dilatation was inversely associated with the outcome cesarean delivery (OR: 0.76, 95%CI: 0.70–0.82). In addition, higher maternal age (OR: 1.06, 95%CI: 1.04–1.09), application of oxytocic agents (OR: 0.55, 95%CI: 0.42–0.72), and obesity (OR: 2.25, 95%CI: 1.51–3.34) were associated with the outcome. Ranking of predictors indicate that cervical dilatation is the most relevant predictor derived from the regression model. Conclusions Advanced cervical dilatation at the time of admission to labor ward does not explain lower emergency cesarean delivery rates in Turkish and Lebanese migrant women, despite the fact that this is the strongest among the predictors for emergency cesarean delivery identified in this study

Do social factors and country of origin contribute towards explaining a “Latina paradox” among immigrant women giving birth in Germany?

Zolitschka KA, Miani C, Breckenkamp J, et al. Do social factors and country of origin contribute towards explaining a “Latina paradox” among immigrant women giving birth in Germany? BMC Public Health. 2019;19(1): 181.Background The “Latina paradox” describes the unexpected association between immigrant status, which is often correlated to low socioeconomic status, and low prevalence of unfavourable birth outcomes. Social (e.g. culture, religion) and/or non-social factors related to country of origin are potentially responsible for this paradox. Methods Questionnaire survey of 6413 women delivering in three large obstetric hospitals in Berlin (Germany) covering socioeconomic and migration status, country of origin (Turkey, Lebanon), and acculturation. Data was linked with routine obstetric data. Logistic regressions were performed to assess the effect of acculturation, affinity to religion and country of origin on preterm birth and small-for-gestational-age (SGA). Results Immigrant women with a low level of acculturation (reference) were less likely to have a preterm birth than those who were highly acculturated (aOR: 1.62, 95%CI: 1.01–2.59), as were women from Turkey compared to non-immigrants (aOR: 0.49, 95%CI: 0.33–0.73). For SGA, we found no epidemiologic paradox; conversely, women from Lebanon had a higher chance (aOR: 1.72, 95%CI: 1.27–2.34) of SGA. Affinity to religion had no influence on birth outcomes. Conclusions There is evidence that low acculturation (but not affinity to religion) contributes towards explaining the epidemiologic paradox with regard to preterm birth, emphasising the influence of socioeconomic characteristics on birth outcomes. The influence of Turkish origin on preterm birth and Lebanese origin on SGA suggests that non-social factors relating to the country of origin are also at play in explaining birth outcome differences, and that the direction of the effect varies depending on the country of origin and the outcome

Comparing provision and appropriateness of health care between immigrants and non-immigrants in Germany using the example of neuraxial anaesthesia during labour: cross-sectional study

Razum O, Reiss K, Breckenkamp J, et al. Comparing provision and appropriateness of health care between immigrants and non-immigrants in Germany using the example of neuraxial anaesthesia during labour: cross-sectional study. BMJ Open. 2017;7(8): e015913.Objective Research on health services for immigrants has mostly been concerned with access barriers but rarely with appropriateness and responsiveness of care. We assessed whether appropriateness and responsiveness of care depend on migration status, using provision of neuraxial anaesthesia (NA) during labour as indicator. In relation to their migration status, we analysed whether (1) women undergoing elective or secondary/urgent secondary caesarean sections (ESCS) appropriately receive NA (instead of general anaesthesia), (2) women delivering vaginally appropriately receive NA and (3) women objecting to NA, for example, for religious reasons, may deliver vaginally without receiving NA (provider responsiveness). Design Cross-sectional study. Setting Three obstetric hospitals in Berlin, Germany. Methods Questionnaire survey covering 6391 women with migration history (first and second generations) and non-immigrant women giving birth; data linkage with routine obstetric data. We assessed the effects of migrant status, German language proficiency, religion and education on the provision of NA (primary outcome) after adjusting for other maternal and obstetric parameters. Results The chance of receiving NA for elective/ESCS was independent of migrant status after controlling for confounding variables (adjusted OR (aOR) 0.93, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.33). In vaginal deliveries, first (but not second) generation women (aOR 0.79, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.95), women with low German language skills (aOR 0.77, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.99) and women with low educational attainment (aOR 0.62, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.82) had lower chances of receiving NA; there was no evidence of overprovision among women with strong affinity to Islam (aOR 0.77, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.94). Conclusions We found evidence for underprovision of care among first-generation immigrants, among women with low German language proficiency and particularly among all women with low educational attainment, irrespective of migration status. There was no evidence for overprovision of care to immigrant women, either inappropriately (general anaesthesia for ESCS) or because of low provider responsiveness (no opt-out for NA in vaginal delivery)

Empfehlungen zur Erhebung und Analyse migrationsbezogener Determinanten in der Public-Health-Forschung

Hintergrund: Etwa jede vierte in Deutschland lebende Person hat nach Definition des Statistischen Bundesamts einen sogenannten Migrationshintergrund (MH), d. h. die Person selbst oder mindestens ein Elternteil wurde ohne die deutsche Staatsangehörigkeit geboren. Allerdings wurde der MH in vielen Studien unterschiedlich definiert. Auch werden durch den MH Personen in unterschiedlichen Lebenslagen zusammengefasst und differenzierte gesundheitswissenschaftliche Analysen sind mit dem MH erschwert. Der Beitrag formuliert Empfehlungen zur Erhebung und Auswertung migrationsbezogener sowie sozialer und struktureller Determinanten der Gesundheit. Erfassung relevanter Gesundheitsdeterminanten: Im Rahmen des Projektes „Improving Health Monitoring in Migrant Populations (IMIRA)“ wurden die bisherigen Ansätze zur Operationalisierung und Messung migrationsbezogener Determinanten auf Grundlage von Literaturrecherchen und Austauschformaten, wie Workshops, Arbeitstreffen, Kongressbeiträgen u. ä. überarbeitet. Anstelle des MH sollten als Mindestindikatoren das Geburtsland der Befragten und deren Eltern, die Aufenthaltsdauer, die Staatsangehörigkeit(en), der Aufenthaltsstatus und Kenntnisse der deutschen Sprache erfasst und als Einzelvariablen analysiert werden. Weitere soziale und strukturelle Determinanten wie der sozioökonomische Status, Wohn- und Arbeitsbedingungen oder selbstberichtete Diskriminierung sollten einbezogen werden. Diskussion: Um gesundheitliche Ungleichheit zu beschreiben und gezielt Bedarfe von Menschen mit Migrationsgeschichte zu identifizieren, ist eine gemeinsame und differenzierte Betrachtung migrationsbezogener und sozialer Determinanten unerlässlich