Neonatal mortality burden and trends in UNHCR refugee camps, 2006-2017: a retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: More than 100 million people were forcibly displaced over the last decade, including millions of refugees displaced across international borders. Although refugee health and well-being has gained increasing attention from researchers in recent years, few studies have examined refugee birth outcomes or newborn health on a regional or global scale. This study uses routine health information system data to examine neonatal mortality burden and trends in refugee camps between 2006 and 2017. METHODS: Refugee population and mortality data were exported from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) Health Information System (HIS) database. Tableau was used to export the data. Stata was used for data cleaning and statistical analysis. Neonatal mortality burdens and trends in refugee camps were analyzed and compared to national and subnational neonatal mortality rates captured by household surveys. FINDINGS: One hundred fifty refugee camps in 21 countries were included in this study, with an average population of 1,725,433 between 2006 and 2017. A total of 663,892 live births and 3382 neonatal deaths were captured during this period. Annual country-level refugee camp neonatal mortality rates (NMR) ranged from 12 to 56 neonatal deaths per 1000 live births. In most countries and years where national population-based surveys are available, refugee camp NMR as reported in the UNHCR HIS was lower than that of the immediate host community. CONCLUSION: The UNHCR HIS provides insights into the neonatal mortality burden among refugees in camp settings and issues to consider in design and use of routine health information systems to monitor neonatal health in sub-national populations. Increased visibility of neonatal deaths and stillbirths among displaced populations can drive advocacy and inform decisions needed to strengthen health systems. Efforts to count every stillbirth and neonatal death are critical, as well as improvements to reporting systems and mechanisms for data review within broader efforts to improve the quality of neonatal care practices within and outside of health facilities.

Discourse on malaria elimination: where do forcibly displaced persons fit in these discussions?

BACKGROUND: Individuals forcibly displaced are some of the poorest people in the world, living in areas where infrastructure and services are at a bare minimum. Out of a total of 10,549,686 refugees protected and assisted by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees globally, 6,917,496 (65.6%) live in areas where malaria is transmitted. Historically, national malaria control programmes have excluded displaced populations. RESULTS: The current discourse on malaria elimination rarely includes discussion of forcibly displaced persons who reside within malaria-eliminating countries. Of the 100 malaria-endemic countries, 64 are controlling malaria and 36 are in some stage of elimination. Of these, 30 malaria-controlling countries and 13 countries in some phase of elimination host displaced populations of ≥50,000, even though 13 of the 36 (36.1%) malaria-elimination countries host displaced populations of ≥50,000 people. DISCUSSION: Now is the time for the malaria community to incorporate forcibly displaced populations residing within malarious areas into malaria control activities. Beneficiaries, whether they are internally displaced persons or refugees, should be viewed as partners in the delivery of malaria interventions and not simply as recipients. CONCLUSION: Until equitable and sustainable malaria control includes everyone residing in an endemic area, the goal of malaria elimination will not be met.

Quantifying the burden of disease associated with inadequate provision of water and sanitation in selected sub-Saharan refugee camps.

A WHO methodology is used for the first time to estimate the burden of disease directly associated with incomplete water and sanitation provision in refugee camps in sub-Saharan African countries. In refugee camps of seven countries, containing just fewer than 1 million people in 2005, there were 132,000 cases of diarrhoea and over 280,000 reported cases of malaria attributable to incomplete water and sanitation provision. In the period from 2005 to 2007 1,400 deaths were estimated to be directly attributable to incomplete water and sanitation alone in refugee camps in Ethiopia, Kenya and Tanzania. A comparison with national morbidity estimates from WHO shows that although diarrhoea estimates in the camps are often higher, mortality estimates are generally much lower, which may reflect on more ready access to medical aid within refugee camps. Despite the many limitations, these estimates highlight the burden of disease connected to incomplete water and sanitation provision in refugee settings and can assist resource managers to identify camps requiring specific interventions. Additionally the results reinforce the importance of increasing dialogue between the water, sanitation and health sectors and underline the fact that efforts to reduce refugee morbidity would be greatly enhanced by strengthening water and sanitation provision.

Conflict-affected displaced persons need to benefit more from HIV and malaria national strategic plans and Global Fund grants.

BACKGROUND: Access to HIV and malaria control programmes for refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs) is not only a human rights issue but a public health priority for affected populations and host populations. The primary source of funding for malaria and HIV programmes for many countries is the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (Global Fund). This article analyses the current HIV and malaria National Strategic Plans (NSPs) and Global Fund approved proposals from rounds 1-8 for countries in Africa hosting populations with refugees and/or IDPs to document their inclusion. METHODS: The review was limited to countries in Africa as they constitute the highest caseload of refugees and IDPs affected by HIV and malaria. Only countries with a refugee and/or IDP population of > or = 10,000 persons were included. NSPs were retrieved from primary and secondary sources while approved Global Fund proposals were obtained from the organisation's website. Refugee figures were obtained from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees' database and IDP figures from the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre. The inclusion of refugees and IDPs was classified into three categories: 1) no reference; 2) referenced; and 3) referenced with specific activities. FINDINGS: A majority of countries did not mention IDPs (57%) compared with 48% for refugees in their HIV NSPs. For malaria, refugees were not included in 47% of NSPs compared with 44% for IDPs. A minority (21-29%) of HIV and malaria NSPs referenced and included activities for refugees and IDPs. There were more approved Global Fund proposals for HIV than malaria for countries with both refugees and IDPs, respectively. The majority of countries with > or =10,000 refugees and IDPs did not include these groups in their approved proposals (61%-83%) with malaria having a higher rate of exclusion than HIV. INTERPRETATION: Countries that have signed the 1951 refugee convention have an obligation to care for refugees and this includes provision of health care. IDPs are citizens of their own country but like refugees may also not be a priority for Governments' NSPs and funding proposals. Besides legal obligations, Governments have a public health imperative to include these groups in NSPs and funding proposals. Governments may wish to add a component for refugees that is additional to the needs for their own citizens. The inclusion of forcibly displaced persons in funding proposals may have positive direct effects for host populations as international and United Nations agencies often have strong logistical capabilities that could benefit both populations. For NSPs, strong and concerted advocacy at global, regional and country levels needs to occur to successfully ensure that affected populations are included in their plans. It is essential for their inclusion to occur if we are to reach the stated goal of universal access and the Millennium Development Goals.