RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Gypsies, Travellers and Roma (referred to as Travellers) are less likely to access health services including immunisation. To improve immunisation rates, it is necessary to understand what helps and hinders individuals in these communities in taking up immunisations. This study had two aims. 1. Investigate the views of Travellers in the UK on the barriers and facilitators to acceptability and uptake of immunisations and explore their ideas for improving immunisation uptake; 2. Examine whether and how these responses vary across and within communities, and for different vaccines (childhood and adult). METHODS: This was a qualitative, cross-sectional interview study informed by the Social Ecological Model. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 174 Travellers from six communities: Romanian Roma, English Gypsy/Irish Travellers (Bristol), English Gypsy (York), Romanian/Slovakian Roma, Scottish Show people (Glasgow) and Irish Traveller (London). The focus was childhood and selected adult vaccines. Data were analysed using the Framework approach. RESULTS: Common accounts of barriers and facilitators were identified across all six Traveller communities, similar to those documented for the general population. All Roma communities experienced additional barriers of language and being in a new country. Men and women described similar barriers and facilitators although women spoke more of discrimination and low literacy. There was broad acceptance of childhood and adult immunisation across and within communities, with current parents perceived as more positive than their elders. A minority of English-speaking Travellers worried about multiple/combined childhood vaccines, adult flu and whooping cough and described barriers to booking and attending immunisation. Cultural concerns about antenatal vaccines and HPV vaccination were most evident in the Bristol English Gypsy/Irish Traveller community. Language, literacy, discrimination, poor school attendance, poverty and housing were identified as barriers across different communities. Trustful relationships with health professionals were important and continuity of care valued. CONCLUSIONS: The experience of many Travellers in this study, and the context through which they make health decisions, is changing. This large study identified key issues that should be considered when taking action to improve uptake of immunisations in Traveller families and reduce the persistent inequalities in coverage. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN20019630 .
Asunto(s)
Etnicidad , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud , Aceptación de la Atención de Salud , Migrantes , Viaje , Vacunación , Adulto , Niño , Estudios Transversales , Emigrantes e Inmigrantes , Femenino , Servicios de Salud , Humanos , Inmunización , Masculino , Investigación Cualitativa , Características de la Residencia , Romaní , Rumanía/etnología , Eslovaquia/etnología , Factores Socioeconómicos , Reino Unido , VacunasRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Gypsies, Travellers and Roma (referred to as Travellers) are less likely to access health services, including immunisation. To improve immunisation rates, we need to understand what helps and hinders individuals in these communities in taking up immunisations. AIMS: (1) Investigate the barriers to and facilitators of acceptability and uptake of immunisations among six Traveller communities across four UK cities; and (2) identify possible interventions to increase uptake of immunisations in these Traveller communities that could be tested in a subsequent feasibility study. METHODS: Three-phase qualitative study underpinned by the social ecological model. Phase 1: interviews with 174 Travellers from six communities: Romanian Roma (Bristol); English Gypsy/Irish Traveller (Bristol); English Gypsy (York); Romanian/Slovakian Roma (Glasgow); Scottish Showpeople (Glasgow); and Irish Traveller (London). Focus on childhood and adult vaccines. Phase 2: interviews with 39 service providers. Data were analysed using the framework approach. Interventions were identified using a modified intervention mapping approach. Phase 3: 51 Travellers and 25 service providers attended workshops and produced a prioritised list of potentially acceptable and feasible interventions. RESULTS: There were many common accounts of barriers and facilitators across communities, particularly across the English-speaking communities. Scottish Showpeople were the most similar to the general population. Roma communities experienced additional barriers of language and being in a new country. Men, women and service providers described similar barriers and facilitators. There was widespread acceptance of childhood and adult immunisation, with current parents perceived as more positive than their elders. A minority of English-speaking Travellers worried about multiple/combined childhood vaccines, adult flu and whooping cough. Cultural concerns about vaccines offered during pregnancy and about human papillomavirus were most evident in the Bristol English Gypsy/Irish Traveller community. Language, literacy, discrimination, poor school attendance, poverty and housing were identified by Travellers and service providers as barriers for some. Trustful relationships with health professionals were important and continuity of care was valued. A few English-speaking Travellers described problems of booking and attending for immunisation. Service providers tailored their approach to Travellers, particularly the Roma. Funding cuts, NHS reforms and poor monitoring challenged their work. Five 'top-priority' interventions were agreed across communities and service providers to improve the immunisation among Travellers who are housed or settled on an authorised site: (1) cultural competence training for health professionals and frontline staff; (2) identification of Travellers in health records to tailor support and monitor uptake; (3) provision of a named frontline person in general practitioner practices to provide respectful and supportive service; (4) flexible and diverse systems for booking appointments, recall and reminders; and (5) protected funding for health visitors specialising in Traveller health, including immunisation. LIMITATIONS: No Travellers living on the roadside or on unofficial encampments were interviewed. We should exert caution in generalising to these groups. FUTURE WORK: To include development, implementation and evaluation of a national policy plan (and practice guidance plan) to promote the uptake of immunisation among Traveller communities. STUDY REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN20019630 and UK Clinical Research Network Portfolio number 15182. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 72. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Asunto(s)
Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud/organización & administración , Romaní/psicología , Romaní/estadística & datos numéricos , Vacunación/psicología , Vacunación/estadística & datos numéricos , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Competencia Cultural , Cultura , Femenino , Conocimientos, Actitudes y Práctica en Salud , Vivienda , Humanos , Entrevistas como Asunto , Lenguaje , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Prejuicio/etnología , Investigación Cualitativa , Factores Socioeconómicos , Medicina Estatal/organización & administración , Confianza , Reino Unido , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Gypsies, Travellers and Roma (referred to here as Travellers) experience significantly poorer health and have shorter life expectancy than the general population. They are also less likely to access health services including immunisation. To improve immunisation rates, we need to understand what helps and hinders individuals in these communities in taking up immunisations. This study has two aims: (1) Investigate the barriers and facilitators to acceptability and uptake of immunisations among six Traveller communities in the UK; (2) Identify potential interventions to increase uptake in these Traveller communities. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A three-phase qualitative study with six Traveller communities. PHASE 1: In each community, we will explore up to 45 Travellers' views about the influences on their immunisation behaviours and ideas for improving uptake in their community. PHASE 2: In each community, we will investigate 6-8 service providers' perspectives on barriers and facilitators to childhood and adult immunisations for Traveller communities with whom they work, and ideas to improve uptake. Interview data will be analysed using the Framework approach. PHASE 3: The findings will be discussed and interventions prioritised in six workshops, each with 10-12 phase 1 and 3-4 phase 2 participants. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This research received approval from NRES Committee Yorkshire and The Humber-Leeds East (Ref. 13/YH/02). It will produce (1) findings on the barriers and facilitators to uptake of immunisations in six Traveller communities; (2) a prioritised list of potentially feasible and acceptable interventions for increasing uptake in these communities; and (3) methodological development in undertaking research with diverse Traveller communities. The study has the potential to inform new ways of delivering services to ensure high immunisation uptake. Findings will be disseminated to participants, relevant UK organisations with responsibility for the implementation of immunisation policy and Traveller health/welfare; and submitted for publication in academic journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN20019630.
Asunto(s)
Educación en Salud/organización & administración , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud/organización & administración , Inmunización , Aceptación de la Atención de Salud/psicología , Salud Pública , Romaní/psicología , Adulto , Protocolos Clínicos , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Femenino , Conocimientos, Actitudes y Práctica en Salud , Humanos , Inmunización/psicología , Lactante , Masculino , Investigación Cualitativa , Romaní/estadística & datos numéricos , Reino Unido/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: MR imaging was performed in very preterm infants by using an MR imager in the neonatal intensive care unit. The aims of this study were to assess the development of myelination in the preterm brain based on MR imaging findings and to compare the ability of T1-weighted conventional spin-echo, inversion recovery fast spin-echo, and T2-weighted fast spin-echo MR imaging to show myelination in these infants. METHODS: MR imaging was performed for 26 preterm infants with a median gestational age of 28 weeks who had normal neurodevelopmental outcomes at 2 years corrected age. RESULTS: Myelin was evident in the gracile and cuneate nuclei and fasciculi, vestibular nuclei, cerebellar vermis, inferior and superior cerebellar peduncles, dentate nucleus, medial longitudinal fasciculus, medial geniculate bodies, subthalamic nuclei, inferior olivary nuclei, ventrolateral nuclei of the thalamus, decussation of the superior cerebellar peduncles, medial lemnisci, lateral lemnisci, and inferior colliculi at < or = 28 weeks gestational age. From this gestational age, myelination was not visualized at any new site until 36 weeks gestational age, when myelin was visualized in the corona radiata, posterior limb of the internal capsule, corticospinal tracts of the precentral and postcentral gyri, and lateral geniculate bodies. T2-weighted fast spin-echo MR imaging showed myelin in gray matter nuclei at an earlier gestational age than did T1-weighted conventional spin-echo or inversion recovery fast spin-echo MR imaging. T1-weighted conventional spin-echo MR imaging showed myelin earlier in some white matter tracts in the preterm brain. CONCLUSION: Myelination was evident in numerous gray and white matter structures in the very preterm brain. A knowledge of myelination milestones will allow delays to be detected at an early stage.