Medical examinations within EU asylum procedures

The Care Full initiative – a joint project of Pharos, AmnestyInternational (Dutch section) and the Dutch Council forRefugees – seeks to create more awareness ofthe importance of medical considerations in theasylum procedure

Validation of the Protect Questionnaire: A tool to detect mental health problems in asylum seekers by non-health professionals

Introduction: Prevalence rates of trauma-related mental disorders such as posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or major depression (MD) are high in asylum seekers. The PROTECT Questionnaire (PQ) was designed to detect indications of those disorders in asylum seekers. Empirical data are needed to evaluate the PQ psychometrically. The objective of this study is to investigate the reliability, validity, sensitivity, and specificity of the PQ. Method: The PQ and validated questionnaires for PTSD (Posttraumatic Diagnostic Scale, PDS) and depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9, PHQ- 9) were filled in by a sample of recently arrived asylum seekers in Germany (n=141). A sub-sample of 91 asylum seekers took part in a structured clinical interview to diagnose PTSD or MD (SCID-I). Results: The PQ showed a one-factor structure and good reliability (Cronbach’s ⍺= .82). It correlated highly with the PDS and the PHQ-9 (rs=.53-.77; ps≤.001). Diagnostic accuracy with regard to PTSD (AUC=.74; SE=.06; p<.001; 95%-CI=.63-.84) and MD (AUC=.72; SE=.06; p<.001; 95%-CI=.61- .83) was adequate, suggesting an optimal cut-off of 8 or 9. By categorizing participants into a low- and high-risk category, the PQ differentiated well between asylum seekers who fulfilled a PTSD or MD diagnosis and those who did not. Discussion: The results support the use of the PQ as a reliable and valid instrument for the purpose of detecting signs and symptoms of the two most common mental disorders in asylum seekers. Persons found to be at risk of mental disorders should be referred to a clinical diagnostic procedure

Expert medico-legal reports: The relationship between levels of consistency and judicial outcomes in asylum seekers in the Netherlands

Introduction: If asylum applicants need to prove that they have been persecuted in their home country, expert judgment of the psychological and physical consequences of torture may support the judicial process. Expert medico-legal reports can be used to assess whether the medical complaints of the asylum seeker are consistent with their asylum account. It is unclear which factors influence medical expert judgement about the consistency between an asylum seeker’s symptoms and story, and to what extent expert medico-legal reports are associated with judicial outcomes. Methods: We analysed 97 medico-legal reports on traumatised asylum seekers in the Netherlands. First, we evaluated the impact of trauma-related and other variables on experts’ judgments of the consistency of symptoms and story. Second, we evaluated the effect of experts’ judgments of symptom-story consistency on subsequent judicial outcomes. Results: Gender, receipt of mental health care and trauma-related variables were associated with symptomstory consistency. Positive asylum decisions were predicted by expert judgments about the presence of physical signs and symptoms of torture, and ill-treatment and their consistency with the refugee’s story, but not psychological symptoms. Conclusion: These results suggest that standardised procedures for the documenting of medical evidence by independent experts can improve judicial decision quality and the need to improve psychological and psychiatric assessments

En favor de los exámenes médicos como parte del procedimiento de asilo en la UE

La Iniciativa Care Full (un proyecto compartido por Pharos, la sección holandesa de Amnistía Internacional y el Consejo Holandés para los Refugiados) procura crear una mayor concienciación sobre la importancia de los aspectos médicos en el procedimiento de asilo

Development and validation of a patient decision aid for prostate Cancer therapy:from paternalistic towards participative shared decision making

Background: Patient decision aids (PDAs) can support the treatment decision making process and empower patients to take a proactive role in their treatment pathway while using a shared decision-making (SDM) approach making participatory medicine possible. The aim of this study was to develop a PDA for prostate cancer that is accurate and user-friendly. Methods: We followed a user-centered design process consisting of five rounds of semi-structured interviews and usability surveys with topics such as informational/decisional needs of users and requirements for PDAs. Our userbase consisted of 8 urologists, 4 radiation oncologists, 2 oncology nurses, 8 general practitioners, 19 former prostate cancer patients, 4 usability experts and 11 healthy volunteers. Results: Informational needs for patients centered on three key factors: treatment experience, post-treatment quality of life, and the impact of side effects. Patients and clinicians valued a PDA that presents balanced information on these factors through simple understandable language and visual aids. Usability questionnaires revealed that patients were more satisfied overall with the PDA than clinicians; however, both groups had concerns that the PDA might lengthen consultation times (42 and 41%, respectively). The PDA is accessible on http://beslissamen.nl/. Conclusions: User-centered design provided valuable insights into PDA requirements but challenges in integrating diverse perspectives as clinicians focus on clinical outcomes while patients also consider quality of life. Nevertheless, it is crucial to involve a broad base of clinical users in order to better understand the decision-making process and to develop a PDA that is accurate, usable, and acceptable

Development and validation of a patient decision aid for prostate Cancer therapy: from paternalistic towards participative shared decision making

Background: Patient decision aids (PDAs) can support the treatment decision making process and empower patients to take a proactive role in their treatment pathway while using a shared decision-making (SDM) approach making participatory medicine possible. The aim of this study was to develop a PDA for prostate cancer that is accurate and user-friendly. Methods: We followed a user-centered design process consisting of five rounds of semi-structured interviews and usability surveys with topics such as informational/decisional needs of users and requirements for PDAs. Our userbase consisted of 8 urologists, 4 radiation oncologists, 2 oncology nurses, 8 general practitioners, 19 former prostate cancer patients, 4 usability experts and 11 healthy volunteers. Results: Informational needs for patients centered on three key factors: treatment experience, post-treatment quality of life, and the impact of side effects. Patients and clinicians valued a PDA that presents balanced information on these factors through simple understandable language and visual aids. Usability questionnaires revealed that patients were more satisfied overall with the PDA than clinicians; however, both groups had concerns that the PDA might lengthen consultation times (42 and 41%, respectively). The PDA is accessible on http://beslissamen.nl/. Conclusions: User-centered design provided valuable insights into PDA requirements but challenges in integrating diverse perspectives as clinicians focus on clinical outcomes while patients also consider quality of life. Nevertheless, it is crucial to involve a broad base of clinical users in order to better understand the decision-making process and to develop a PDA that is accurate, usable, and acceptable