Access to healthcare for people seeking and refused asylum in Great Britain: a review of evidence

This research report is a review of evidence looking at the barriers people seeking or refused asylum face in trying to access healthcare services in the UK, and what may help them to do so more easily. This report, and the partner report on lived experiences (https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/publication-download/lived-experiences-access-healthcare-people-seeking-and-refused-asylum), will be of interest to people who play an important role in delivering healthcare and related support services to people seeking or refused asylum. We have also made recommendations for what changes are needed (https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/publication-download/making-sure-people-seeking-and-refused-asylum-can-access-healthcare-what-needs) to make sure that people seeking and refused asylum have full enjoyment of their right to health. This review was carried out by Imperial College London, with primary data provided by Doctors of the World UK

The lived experiences of access to healthcare for people seeking and refused asylum

This research aims to explore the lived experiences of accessing healthcare among people currently seeking asylum and those who have had their claim for asylum refused, as well as the experiences of health service providers working with these communities. It examines the extent to which people are able to exercise their rights to access healthcare. It looks at the differences between those currently in the asylum system and those who have had their claim refused in England, Scotland and Wales. This report, and the partner report providing a review of evidence (https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/publication-download/access-healthcare-people-seeking-and-refused-asylum-great-britain-review), will be of interest to people who play an important role in delivering healthcare and related support services to people seeking or refused asylum. We have also made recommendations for what changes are needed (https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/publication-download/making-sure-people-seeking-and-refused-asylum-can-access-healthcare-what-needs) to make sure that people seeking and refused asylum have full enjoyment of their right to health. This report was produced in collaboration with Imperial College London and Doctors of the World UK

Do Quality Improvement Initiatives Improve Outcomes for Patients in Antiretroviral Programs in Low- and Middle-Income Countries? A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: There have been a range of quality improvement (QI) and quality assurance initiatives in low- and middle-income countries to improve antiretroviral therapy (ART) treatment outcomes for people living with HIV. To date, these initiatives have not been systematically assessed and little is known about how effective, cost-effective, or sustainable these strategies are in improving clinical outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review adhering to PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO ID: CRD42017071848), searching PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane database of controlled trials for articles reporting on the effectiveness of QI and quality assurance initiatives in HIV programs in low- and middle-income countries in relation to ART uptake, retention in care, adherence, viral load suppression, mortality, and other outcomes including cost-effectiveness and long-term sustainability. RESULTS: One thousand eight hundred sixty articles were found, of which 29 were included. QI approaches were categorized as follows: (1) health system approaches using QI methods; (2) QI learning networks including collaboratives; (3) standard-based methods that use QI tools to improve performance gaps; and (4) campaigns using QI methods. The greatest improvements were seen in ART uptake [median increase of 14.0%; interquartile range (IQR) -9.0 to 29.3], adherence [median increase of 22.0% (IQR -7.0 to 25.0)], and viral load suppression [median increase 26.0% (IQR -8.0 to 26.0)]. CONCLUSIONS: QI interventions can be effective in improving clinical outcomes; however, there was significant variability, making it challenging to identify which aspects of interventions lead to clinical improvements. Standardizing reporting and assessment of QI initiatives is needed, supported by national quality policies and directorates, and robust research

The relationship between mental health and risk of active tuberculosis: a systematic review

Objectives Tuberculosis (TB) and mental illnesses are highly prevalent globally and often coexist. While poor mental health is known to modulate immune function, whether mental disorders play a causal role in TB incidence is unknown. This systematic review examines the association between mental health and TB disease risk to inform clinical and public health measures. Design Systematic review, following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Search strategy and selection criteria MEDLINE, PsycINFO and PsycEXTRA databases were searched alongside reference list and citation searching. Inclusion criteria were original research studies published 1 January 1970–11 May 2020 reporting data on the association between mental health and TB risk. Data extraction, appraisal and synthesis Data were extracted on study design and setting, sample characteristics, measurement of mental illness and TB, and outcomes including effect size or prevalence. Studies were critically appraised using Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) and Appraisal Tool for Cross-Sectional Studies (AXIS) checklists. Results 1546 records published over 50 years were screened, resulting in 10 studies included reporting data from 607 184 individuals. Studies span across Asia, South America and Africa, and include mood and psychotic disorders. There is robust evidence from cohort studies in Asia demonstrating that depression and schizophrenia can increase risk of active TB, with effect estimates ranging from HR=1.15 (95% CI 1.03 to 1.28) to 2.63 (95% CI 1.74 to 3.96) for depression and HR=1.52 (95% CI 1.29 to 1.79) to RR=3.04 for schizophrenia. These data align with evidence from cross-sectional studies, for example, a large survey across low-income and middle-income countries (n=242 952) reports OR=3.68 (95% CI 3.01 to 4.50) for a depressive episode in those with TB symptoms versus those without. Conclusions Individuals with mental illnesses including depression and schizophrenia experience increased TB incidence and represent a high-risk population to target for screening and treatment. Integrated care for mental health and TB is needed, and interventions tackling mental illnesses and underlying drivers may help reduce TB incidence globally. PROSPERO registration number CRD42019158071

"It's a life you're playing with": A qualitative study on experiences of NHS maternity services among undocumented migrant women in England.

BACKGROUND: Undocumented migrant women experience complex barriers to maternity services, are less likely to receive the recommended level of maternity care, and have poorer obstetric outcomes than non-migrant women. There are concerns increasing restrictions on entitlement to health services have a detrimental impact on access to services and obstetric outcomes, particularly among undocumented migrant women. The study aimed to investigate the experiences of undocumented migrant women who have been pregnant in England, and factors affecting access to care and health outcomes. METHODS: We conducted in-depth semi-structured interviews June-December 2017 with a purposive sample of migrant women born outside the UK (aged>18) who had experiences of pregnancy and undocumented status (without permission to reside) in the UK, recruited through Doctors of the World (DOTW) UK. Interpreting services were used on request. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analysed using thematic analysis. Ethical approval: Imperial College London Research Ethics Committee (ICREC reference: 17IC3924). RESULTS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 participants, 10 of whom had their first antenatal appointment after the national target of 13 weeks, and nine of whom reported complications. Themes defining women's experiences of pregnancy included: restricted agency, intersecting stressors, and an ongoing cycle of precarity, defined by legal status, social isolation, and economic status. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides new evidence of women's experiences of pregnancy in the UK in the context of increasingly restrictive health policies including charging and data sharing. Six recommendations are made to ensure the UK and other migrant receiving countries work towards reducing inequalities and achieving national and global targets for maternal and child health and universal health coverage

Participatory approaches in the development of health interventions for migrants: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Analysis of participatory approaches to developing health interventions for migrants and how approaches embody core participatory principles of inclusivity and democracy. DESIGN: A systematic review of original articles. Electronic searches within the databases MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health and PsychINFO (from inception-November 2020). ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION: Original peer-reviewed articles reporting research to develop and implement a health intervention for migrants, incorporating participatory approaches. We defined migrants as foreign-born individuals. Only articles reporting the full research cycle (inception, design, implementation, analysis, evaluation, dissemination) were included. DATA EXTRACTION: We extracted information related to who was involved in research (migrants or other non-academic stakeholders), the research stage at which they were involved (inception, design, implementation, analysis, evaluation, dissemination), the method of their involvement and how this aligned with the core principles of participatory research-categorising studies as exhibiting active or pseudo (including proxy and indirect) participation. RESULTS: 1793 publications were screened, of which 28 were included in our analysis. We found substantial variation in the application of participatory approaches in designing health interventions targeting migrants: across 168 individual research stages analysed across the 28 studies, we recorded 46 instances of active participation of migrants, 30 instances of proxy participation and 24 instances of indirect participation. All studies involved non-academic stakeholders in at least one stage of the research, only two studies exhibited evidence of active participation of migrants across all research stages. Evidence is limited due to the variability of terms and approaches used. CONCLUSIONS: Important shortfalls in the meaningful inclusion of migrants in developing health interventions exist, suggesting a more rigorous and standardised approach is warranted to better define and deliver participatory research and improve quality. REGISTRATION: This review followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines and is registered on the Open Science Framework (osf.io/2bnz5)

Country-specific approaches to latent tuberculosis screening targeting migrants in EU/EEA* countries: A survey of national experts, September 2019 to February 2020.

BackgroundMigrants in low tuberculosis (TB) incidence countries in the European Union (EU)/European Economic Area (EEA) are an at-risk group for latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) and are increasingly included in LTBI screening programmes.AimTo investigate current approaches and implement LTBI screening in recently arrived migrants in the EU/EEA and Switzerland.MethodsAt least one TB expert working at a national level from the EU/EEA and one TB expert from Switzerland completed an electronic questionnaire. We used descriptive analyses to calculate percentages, and framework analysis to synthesise free-text responses.ResultsExperts from 32 countries were invited to participate (30 countries responded): 15 experts reported an LTBI screening programme targeting migrants in their country; five reported plans to implement one in the near future; and 10 reported having no programme. LTBI screening was predominantly for asylum seekers (n = 12) and refugees (n = 11). Twelve countries use 'country of origin' as the main eligibility criteria. The countries took similar approaches to diagnosis and treatment but different approaches to follow-up. Six experts reported that drop-out rates in migrants were higher compared with non-migrant groups. Most of the experts (n = 22) called for a renewed focus on expanding efforts to screen for LTBI in migrants arriving in low-incidence countries.ConclusionWe found a range of approaches to LTBI screening of migrants in the EU/EEA and Switzerland. Findings suggest a renewed focus is needed to expand and strengthen efforts to meaningfully include migrants in these programmes, in order to meet regional and global elimination targets for TB

Multidrug-resistant tuberculosis treatment adherence in migrants: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) is a growing concern in meeting global targets for TB control. In high-income low-TB-incidence countries, a disproportionate number of MDR-TB cases occur in migrant (foreign-born) populations, with concerns about low adherence rates in these patients compared to the host non-migrant population. Tackling MDR-TB in this context may, therefore, require unique approaches. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify and synthesise data on MDR-TB treatment adherence in migrant patients to inform evidence-based strategies to improve care pathways and health outcomes in this group. METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in line with PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO 42017070756). The databases Embase, MEDLINE, Global Health and PubMed were searched to 24 May 2017 for primary research reporting MDR-TB treatment adherence and outcomes in migrant populations, with no restrictions on dates or language. A meta-analysis was conducted using random-effects models. RESULTS: From 413 papers identified in the database search, 15 studies reporting on MDR-TB treatment outcomes for 258 migrants and 174 non-migrants were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. The estimated rate of adherence to MDR-TB treatment across migrant patients was 71% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 58-84%], with non-adherence reported among 20% (95% CI = 4-37%) of migrant patients. A key finding was that there were no differences in estimated rates of adherence [risk ratio (RR) = 1.05; 95% CI = 0.82-1.34] or non-adherence (RR = 0.97; 95% CI = 0.79-1.36) between migrants and non-migrants. CONCLUSIONS: MDR-TB treatment adherence rates among migrants in high-income low-TB-incidence countries are approaching global targets for treatment success (75%), and are comparable to rates in non-migrants. The findings highlight that only just over 70% of migrant and non-migrant patients adhere to MDR-TB treatment. The results point to the importance of increasing adherence in all patient groups, including migrants, with an emphasis on tailoring care based on social risk factors for poor adherence. We believe that MDR-TB treatment targets are not ambitious enough

Strategies and action points to ensure equitable uptake of COVID-19 vaccinations: A national qualitative interview study to explore the views of undocumented migrants, asylum seekers, and refugees.

Introduction: Early evidence confirms lower COVID-19 vaccine uptake in established ethnic minority populations, yet there has been little focus on understanding vaccine hesitancy and barriers to vaccination in migrants. Growing populations of precarious migrants (including undocumented migrants, asylum seekers and refugees) in the UK and Europe are considered to be under-immunised groups and may be excluded from health systems, yet little is known about their views on COVID-19 vaccines specifically, which are essential to identify key solutions and action points to strengthen vaccine roll-out. Methods: We did an in-depth semi-structured qualitative interview study of recently arrived migrants (foreign-born, >18 years old; <10 years in the UK) to the UK with precarious immigration status between September 2020 and March 2021, seeking their input into strategies to strengthen COVID-19 vaccine delivery and uptake. We used the 'Three Cs' model (confidence, complacency and convenience) to explore COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, barriers and access. Data were analysed using a thematic framework approach. Data collection continued until data saturation was reached, and no novel concepts were arising. The study was approved by the University of London ethics committee (REC 2020.00630). Results: We approached 20 migrant support groups nationwide, recruiting 32 migrants (mean age 37.1 years; 21 [66%] female; mean time in the UK 5.6 years [SD 3.7 years]), including refugees (n = 3), asylum seekers (n = 19), undocumented migrants (n = 8) and migrants with limited leave to remain (n = 2) from 15 different countries (5 WHO regions). 23 (72%) of 32 migrants reported being hesitant about accepting a COVID-19 vaccine and two (6%) would definitely not accept a vaccine. Participants communicated concerns over vaccine content, side-effects, lack of accessible information in an appropriate language, lack of trust in the health system and low perceived need. A range of barriers to accessing the COVID-19 vaccine were reported and concerns expressed that their communities would be excluded from or de-prioritised in the roll-out. Undocumented migrants described fears over being charged and facing immigration checks if they present for a vaccine. Participants (n = 10) interviewed after recent government announcements that COVID-19 vaccines can be accessed without facing immigration checks remained unaware of this. Participants stated that convenience of access would be a key factor in their decision around whether to accept a vaccine and proposed alternative access points to primary care services (for example, walk-in centres in trusted places such as foodbanks, community centres and charities), alongside promoting registration with primary care for all, and working closely with communities to produce accessible information on COVID-19 vaccination. Conclusions: Precarious migrants may be hesitant about accepting a COVID-19 vaccine and face multiple and unique barriers to access, requiring simple but innovative solutions to ensure equitable access and uptake. Vaccine hesitancy and low awareness around entitlement and relevant access points could be easily addressed with clear, accessible, and tailored information campaigns, co-produced and delivered by trusted sources within marginalised migrant communities. These findings have immediate relevance to the COVID-19 vaccination initiatives in the UK and in other European and high-income countries with diverse migrant populations. Funding: NIHR