Racism against healthcare users in inpatient care: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Racism in the healthcare system has become a burgeoning focus in health policy-making and research. Existing research has shown both interpersonal and structural forms of racism limiting access to quality healthcare for racialised healthcare users. Nevertheless, little is known about the specifics of racism in the inpatient sector, specifically hospitals and rehabilitation facilities. The aim of this scoping review is therefore to map the evidence on racial discrimination experienced by people receiving treatment in inpatient settings (hospitals and rehabilitation facilities) or their caregivers in high-income countries, focusing specifically on whether intersectional axes of discrimination have been taken into account when describing these experiences. METHODS: Based on the conceptual framework developed by Arksey and O'Malley, this scoping review surveyed existing research on racism and racial discrimination in inpatient care in high-income countries published between 2013 and 2023. The software Rayyan was used to support the screening process while MAXQDA was used for thematic coding. RESULTS: Forty-seven articles were included in this review. Specifics of the inpatient sector included different hospitalisation, admission and referral rates within and across hospitals; the threat of racial discrimination from other healthcare users; and the spatial segregation of healthcare users according to ethnic, religious or racialised criteria. While most articles described some interactions between race and other social categories in the sample composition, the framework of intersectionality was rarely considered explicitly during analysis. DISCUSSION: While the USA continue to predominate in discussions, other high-income countries including Canada, Australia and the UK also examine racism in their own healthcare systems. Absent from the literature are studies from a wider range of European countries as well as of racialised and disadvantaged groups other than refugees or recent immigrants. Research in this area would also benefit from an engagement with approaches to intersectionality in public health to produce a more nuanced understanding of the interactions of racism with other axes of discrimination. As inpatient care exhibits a range of specific structures, future research and policy-making ought to consider these specifics to develop targeted interventions, including training for non-clinical staff and robust, transparent and accessible complaint procedures.

[Supporting rehabilitation facilities in implementing diversity-sensitive care: Development of the DiversityKAT manual]. / Unterstützung von Rehabilitationseinrichtungen bei der Umsetzung einer diversitätssensiblen Versorgung: Entwicklung der DiversityKAT-Handreichung.

BACKGROUND: Expectations regarding health care including rehabilitation differ depending on age, gender, and also the migration history of the patient population. To meet the diverse expectations, health care needs to be diversity-sensitive, which can have a positive effect on the utilization and outcomes of care. Diversity-sensitive care, however, should take into consideration not only the expectations of diverse patient groups but also the opportunities and challenges offered by diversity of staff. Managers of health care facilities and health care staff in Germany are well aware of the need for diversity-sensitive care, but corresponding measures, so far, have been applied rarely and only unsystematically. The aim of the study was to develop a manual consisting of a catalogue of instruments and a guideline that can support rehabilitation facilities in implementing diversity-sensitive care. METHODS: A mixed methods approach was used for the study. Based on a scoping review, suitable instruments (n=34) were identified that can be used for the implementation of diversity-sensitive health care. Consensus on a draft of the manual was then reached in seven focus group discussions with health care staff (n=44) and a discussion circle consisting of n=5 representatives of the rehabilitation providers. RESULTS: The DiversityKAT manual, which was developed in a participatory manner, presents diversity-sensitive tools, including instructions, questionnaires, checklists and concepts that can be used to take into account the diversity of needs and expectations in everyday health care. In line with the feedback from health care staff, the manual includes information that can be used as a step-by-step guide to select and implement appropriate tools. At the request of the staff and the rehabilitation providers, exemplary case descriptions were added to present the use of selected instruments in specific situations. A matrix was developed for purposes of quick orientation and pre-selection of suitable instruments. DISCUSSION: Through practice-oriented advice and low-threshold guidance, the DiversityKAT-manual can increase user orientation in rehabilitation but needs to be further examined in future evaluation studies.

What are the reasons for refusing a COVID-19 vaccine? A qualitative analysis of social media in Germany.

BACKGROUND: Vaccination against COVID-19 has been available in Germany since December 2020. However, about 30% of the population report not wanting to be vaccinated. In order to increase the willingness of the population to get vaccinated, data on the acceptance of vaccination and its influencing factors are necessary. Little is known about why individuals refuse the COVID-19 vaccination. The aim of this study was to investigate the reasons leading to rejecting vaccination, based on posts from three social media sites. METHODS: The German-language versions of Instagram, Twitter and YouTube were searched regarding negative attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination. Data was extracted until a saturation effect could be observed. The data included posts created from January 20, 2020 to May 2, 2021. This time frame roughly covers the period from the first reports of the spread of SARS-CoV-2 up to the general availability of vaccines against COVID-19 in Germany. We used an interpretive thematic approach to analyze the data and to inductively generate codes, subcategories and categories. RESULTS: Based on 333 posts written by 323 contributing users, we identified six main categories of reasons for refusing a COVID-19 vaccination: Low perceived benefit of vaccination, low perceived risk of contracting COVID-19, health concerns, lack of information, systemic mistrust and spiritual or religious reasons. The analysis reveals a lack of information among users and the spread of misinformation with regard to COVID-19 and vaccination. Users feel inadequately informed about vaccination or do not understand the information available. These information gaps may be related to information not being sufficiently sensitive to the needs of the target group. In addition to limited information for the general population, misinformation on the internet can also be an important reason for refusing vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: The study emphasizes the relevance of providing trustworthy and quality-assured information on COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccination to all population groups. In addition, vaccinations should be easily accessible in order to promote the population's willingness to be vaccinated.