RESUMO
Adult and adolescent migrants worldwide, and those arriving in Europe, are an under-immunised group for routine vaccinations due to missed childhood vaccines and doses in their countries of origin, and their subsequent marginalisation from health and vaccination systems. Declining population-level coverage for routine vaccines across Europe, which has accelerated post-pandemic, places these and other under-immunised populations at even greater risk of vaccine-preventable diseases. However, despite clear guidelines around the importance of delivering 'catch-up' vaccination throughout the life-course, migrants are rarely effectively incorporated into routine vaccination programmes on arrival to Europe. These populations have subsequently been involved in outbreaks, including measles and diphtheria, and are missing opportunities to receive more recently introduced vaccines such as HPV to align them with European vaccine schedules. WHO's new Immunization Agenda 2030 places a renewed emphasis on equitable access to vaccine systems and integrating catch-up vaccination for missed vaccines and doses throughout the life-course. In addition, lessons learned and innovations from the COVID-19 pandemic merit further consideration in the design and delivery of more inclusive vaccination programmes. We describe current gaps in policy and practice around life-course vaccination in migrant populations, key factors that drive low vaccine uptake and coverage, and explore the benefits of participatory approaches to designing and delivering interventions with impacted communities, to define new strategies to advance vaccine equity across the Region.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: The Middle East and North African (MENA) region is characterised by high and complex migration flows, yet little is known about the health of migrant populations, their levels of underimmunisation and access to healthcare provision. Data are needed to support regional elimination and control targets for key diseases and the design and delivery of programmes to improve health outcomes in these groups. This protocol describes a suite of seven systematic reviews that aim to identify, appraise and synthesise the available evidence on the burden and health outcomes, policies and access (barriers and facilitators) related to these mobile populations in the region. METHODS: Seven systematic reviews will cover three questions to explore the: (1) burden and health outcomes, (2) policies and (3) healthcare barriers and facilitators for the following seven disease areas in migrants in the MENA region: tuberculosis, HIV and hepatitis B and C, malaria and neglected tropical diseases, diabetes, mental health, maternal and neonatal health, and vaccine-preventable diseases. We will search electronic databases for studies in any language (year 2000-2023), reference-check relevant publications and cross-check included studies with experts. We will search for grey literature by hand searching key databases and websites (including regional organisations and MoH websites) for country-specific guidelines and talking to our network of experts for local and regional reports and key datasets. We will assess the studies and policies for their quality using appropriate tools. We will meta-analyse the data by disease outcome if they are of sufficient volume and similarity. Where meta-analysis is not possible and where data are on policy or access, we will narratively synthesise the evidence using summary tables, figures and text. DISSEMINATION: We anticipate disseminating the findings through peer-reviewed publications, conferences and other formats relevant to all stakeholders. We are following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and protocols will be registered on International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews.
Assuntos
Política de Saúde , Acessibilidade aos Serviços de Saúde , Revisões Sistemáticas como Assunto , Migrantes , Humanos , África do Norte , Oriente Médio , Projetos de PesquisaRESUMO
The COVID-19 pandemic disproportionately impacted intersectionally marginalised migrants, revealing systemic disparities in health outcomes and vaccine uptake. Understanding the underlying social and structural factors influencing health behaviours is necessary to develop tailored interventions for migrants, but these factors have been seldom explored. This qualitative study aimed to explore contextual factors shaping COVID-19 vaccination decision-making among Congolese migrants in the UK.A community-based participatory research study was designed and led by a community-academic partnership in London, UK (2021-2022). Peer-led, semi-structured interviews were conducted in Lingala with 32 adult Congolese migrants and explored beliefs, perceptions and lived experiences of migration, healthcare, vaccination and the COVID-19 pandemic. Reflexive thematic analysis generated two themes and a model conceptualising the vaccination decision-making process. Participants and community partners were financially compensated; ethics was granted by the University of London ethics committee (REC: 2021.0128).Participants highlighted the incompatibility of lockdown restrictions with their communal culture, which intensified feelings of exclusion and alienation. Concerns about COVID-19 vaccination were attributed to safety and effectiveness, partly informed by experiences and legacies of racial discrimination and exploitation. Inequality in the pandemic response and COVID-19 outcomes heightened participants' sense that their views and needs were being overlooked, and government sources and information were perceived as coercive. Our model depicts the interplay between institutional trust, belonging, and message perception, which shaped participants' vaccination decisions and led to (non-)engagement with COVID-19 vaccination. This research enhances understanding of how social and contextual factors may influence migrants' engagement with health interventions. It underscores the importance of partnering with migrant communities to understand their needs in context and co-design tailored interventions and inclusive messaging strategies that promote trust and belonging. Implementing systemic changes to address structural inequalities will be crucial to create an environment that supports engagement with health-protective behaviours and enhances health outcomes among migrant communities.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The WHO's global hepatitis strategy aims to achieve viral hepatitis elimination by 2030. Migrant children and pregnant persons represent an important target group for prevention strategies. However, evidence on the burden of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) infection and the factors affecting its incidence is lacking. METHODS: EMBASE, Global Health, Global Index Medicus, Web of Science and Medline were searched for articles in any language from 1 January 2012 to 8 June 2022. Studies reporting CHB prevalence, disease severity, complications and/or prevention strategies, including vaccination, prevention of vertical transmission and access to care/treatment for migrant children and pregnant migrants, were included. Pooled estimates of CHB prevalence and hepatitis B vaccination (HBV) coverage among migrant children were calculated using random effects meta-analysis. FINDINGS: 42 studies were included, 27 relating to migrant children and 15 to pregnant migrants across 12 European countries, involving data from 64 773 migrants. Migrants had a higher incidence of CHB than host populations. Among children, the pooled prevalence of CHB was higher for unaccompanied minors (UAM) (5%, [95% CI: 3-7%]) compared to other child migrants, including internationally adopted children (IAC) and refugees (1%, [95% CI: 1-2%]). Region of origin was identified as a risk factor for CHB, with children from Africa and pregnant migrants from Africa, Eastern Europe and China at the highest risk. Pooled estimates of HBV vaccine coverage were lower among UAM (12%, [95% CI: 3-21%]) compared to other child migrants (50%, [95% CI: 37-63%]). CONCLUSION: A range of modifiable determinants of HBV prevalence in migrant children and pregnant persons were identified, including sub-optimal screening, prevention and continuum of care. There is a need to develop evidence-based approaches in hepatitis care for these groups, thereby contributing towards global viral hepatitis elimination goals.
Assuntos
Migrantes , Humanos , Gravidez , Feminino , Migrantes/estatística & dados numéricos , Europa (Continente)/epidemiologia , Criança , Prevalência , Vacinas contra Hepatite B/administração & dosagem , Hepatite B/epidemiologia , Hepatite B/prevenção & controle , Hepatite B Crônica/epidemiologia , Hepatite B Crônica/prevenção & controle , Complicações Infecciosas na Gravidez/epidemiologia , Complicações Infecciosas na Gravidez/prevenção & controle , Transmissão Vertical de Doenças Infecciosas/prevenção & controle , IncidênciaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Migrants in the UK and Europe face vulnerability to vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs) due to missed childhood vaccines and doses and marginalisation from health systems. Ensuring migrants receive catch-up vaccinations, including MMR, Td/IPV, MenACWY, and HPV, is essential to align them with UK and European vaccination schedules and ultimately reduce morbidity and mortality. However, recent evidence highlights poor awareness and implementation of catch-up vaccination guidelines by UK primary care staff, requiring novel approaches to strengthen the primary care pathway. METHODS: The 'Vacc on Track' study (May 2021-September 2022) aimed to measure under-vaccination rates among migrants in UK primary care and establish new referral pathways for catch-up vaccination. Participants included migrants aged 16 or older, born outside of Western Europe, North America, Australia, or New Zealand, in two London boroughs. Quantitative data on vaccination history, referral, uptake, and sociodemographic factors were collected, with practice nurses prompted to deliver catch-up vaccinations following UK guidelines. Focus group discussions and in-depth interviews with staff and migrants explored views on delivering catch-up vaccination, including barriers, facilitators, and opportunities. Data were analysed using STATA12 and NVivo 12. RESULTS: Results from 57 migrants presenting to study sites from 18 countries (mean age 41 [SD 7.2] years; 62% female; mean 11.3 [SD 9.1] years in UK) over a minimum of 6 months of follow-up revealed significant catch-up vaccination needs, particularly for MMR (49 [86%] required catch-up vaccination) and Td/IPV (50 [88%]). Fifty-three (93%) participants were referred for any catch-up vaccination, but completion of courses was low (6 [12%] for Td/IPV and 33 [64%] for MMR), suggesting individual and systemic barriers. Qualitative in-depth interviews (n = 39) with adult migrants highlighted the lack of systems currently in place in the UK to offer catch-up vaccination to migrants on arrival and the need for health-care provider skills and knowledge of catch-up vaccination to be improved. Focus group discussions and interviews with practice staff (n = 32) identified limited appointment/follow-up time, staff knowledge gaps, inadequate engagement routes, and low incentivisation as challenges that will need to be addressed. However, they underscored the potential of staff champions, trust-building mechanisms, and community-based approaches to strengthen catch-up vaccination uptake among migrants. CONCLUSIONS: Given the significant catch-up vaccination needs of migrants in our sample, and the current barriers to driving uptake identified, our findings suggest it will be important to explore this public health issue further, potentially through a larger study or trial. Strengthening existing pathways, staff capacity and knowledge in primary care, alongside implementing new strategies centred on cultural competence and building trust with migrant communities will be important focus areas.
Assuntos
Medicina Geral , Migrantes , Vacinação , Humanos , Projetos Piloto , Masculino , Adolescente , Feminino , Adulto , Reino Unido , Adulto Jovem , Vacinação/estatística & dados numéricos , Medicina Geral/estatística & dados numéricos , Pessoa de Meia-IdadeRESUMO
Bilateral acetabular fractures, though rare, pose significant challenges in both diagnosis and management due to their association with high-energy trauma and the potential for long-term disability. This case report presents the clinical course of a 27-year-old female who presented to our department after a motorcycle accident with bilateral acetabular fractures. Initial assessment revealed nondisplaced bilateral acetabular fractures, along with associated injuries including a right ulnar styloid fracture. Further evaluation via 3D CT scan delineated associated column fractures on the right and posterior + anterior wall fractures on the left, classified according to the Letournel and Judet system. Notably, this specific combination of acetabular fractures has not been documented in existing literature as per our investigation. The surgical intervention involved an anterior intrapelvic approach for open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of the right acetabulum, while the left acetabulum was managed conservatively. Postoperatively, the patient is scheduled for non-weightbearing activity until radiographic evidence of fracture healing is observed. This case underscores the importance of tailored surgical approaches and comprehensive management strategies in optimizing outcomes for patients with bilateral acetabular fractures.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization's (WHO) Immunization Agenda 2030 emphasises ensuring equitable access to vaccination across the life course. This includes placing an emphasis on migrant populations who may have missed key childhood vaccines, doses, and boosters due to disrupted healthcare systems and the migration process, or differing vaccination schedules in home countries. Guidelines exist in the UK for offering catch-up vaccinations to adolscent and adult migrants with incomplete or uncertain vaccination status (including MMR, Td-IPV, MenACWY, HPV), but emerging evidence suggests awareness and implementation in primary care is poor. It is unclear whether patient-level barriers to uptake of catch-up vaccinations also exist. We explored experiences and views around catch-up vaccination among adult migrants from a range of backgrounds, to define strategies for improving catch-up vaccination policy and practice. METHODS: In-depth semi-structured interviews were carried out in two phases with adult migrant populations (refugees, asylum seekers, undocumented migrants, those with no recourse to public funds) on views and experiences around vaccination, involving a team of peer researchers from specific migrant communities trained through the study. In Phase 1, we conducted remote interviews with migrants resident in the UK for < 10 years, from diverse backgrounds. In Phase 2, we engaged specifically Congolese and Angolan migrants as part of a community-based participatory study. Topic guides were developed iteratively and piloted. Participants were recruited using purposive, opportunistic and snowball sampling methods. Interviews were conducted in English (interpreters offered), Lingala or French and were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed using a thematic framework approach in NVivo 12. RESULTS: 71 participants (39 in Phase 1, 32 in Phase 2) were interviewed (Mean age 43.6 [SD:12.4] years, 69% female, mean 9.5 [SD:7] years in the UK). Aside from COVID-19 vaccines, most participants reported never having been offered vaccinations or asked about their vaccination history since arriving in the UK as adults. Few participants mentioned being offered specific catch-up vaccines (e.g. MMR/Td-IPV) when attending a healthcare facility on arrival in the UK. Vaccines such as flu vaccines, pregnancy-related or pre-travel vaccination were more commonly mentioned. In general, participants were not aware of adult catch-up vaccination but regarded it positively when it was explained. A few participants expressed concerns about side-effects, risks/inconveniences associated with access (e.g. links to immigration authorities, travel costs), preference for natural remedies, and hesitancy to engage in further vaccination campaigns due to the intensity of COVID-19 vaccination campaigns. Trust was a major factor in vaccination decisions, with distinctions noted within and between groups; some held a healthcare professional's recommendation in high regard, while others were less trusting towards the healthcare system because of negative experiences of the NHS and past experiences of discrimination, injustice and marginalisation by wider authorities. CONCLUSIONS: The major barrier to adult catch-up vaccination for missed routine immunisations and doses in migrant communities in the UK is the limited opportunities, recommendations or tailored vaccination information presented to migrants by health services. This could be improved with financial incentives for provision of catch-up vaccination in UK primary care, alongside training of healthcare professionals to support catch-up immunisation and raise awareness of existing guidelines. It will also be essential to address root causes of mistrust around vaccination, where it exists among migrants, by working closely with communities to understand their needs and meaningfully involving migrant populations in co-producing tailored information campaigns and culturally relevant interventions to improve coverage.
Assuntos
Migrantes , Cobertura Vacinal , Vacinação , Humanos , Reino Unido , Adulto , Feminino , Masculino , Vacinação/psicologia , Cobertura Vacinal/estatística & dados numéricos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Entrevistas como Assunto , Adulto Jovem , Refugiados , COVID-19/prevenção & controleRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Ensuring vaccination coverage reaches established herd immunity thresholds (HITs) is the cornerstone of any vaccination programme. Diverse migrant populations in European countries have been associated with cases of vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs) and outbreaks, yet it is not clear to what extent they are an under-immunized group. METHODS: We did a systematic review and meta-analysis to synthesize peer-reviewed published primary research reporting data on the immune status of migrants in EU/EEA countries, the UK and Switzerland, calculating their pooled immunity coverage for measles, mumps, rubella and diphtheria using random-effects models. We searched on Web of Science, Embase, Global Health and MEDLINE (1 January 2000 to 10 June 2022), with no language restrictions. The protocol is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42018103666). FINDINGS: Of 1103 abstracts screened, 62 met eligibility criteria, of which 39 were included in the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis included 75 089 migrants, predominantly from outside Europe. Pooled immunity coverage among migrant populations was well below the recommended HIT for diphtheria (n = 7, 57.4% [95% confidence interval (CI): 43.1-71.7%] I2 = 99% vs HIT 83-86%), measles (n = 21, 83.7% [95% CI: 79.2-88.2] I2 = 99% vs HIT 93-95%) and mumps (n = 8, 67.1% [95% CI: 50.6-83.6] I2 = 99% vs HIT 88-93%) and midway for rubella (n = 29, 85.6% [95% CI: 83.1-88.1%] I2 = 99% vs HIT 83-94%), with high heterogeneity across studies. INTERPRETATION: Migrants in Europe are an under-immunized group for a range of important VPDs, with this study reinforcing the importance of engaging children, adolescents and adults in 'catch-up' vaccination initiatives on arrival for vaccines, doses and boosters they may have missed in their home countries. Co-designing strategies to strengthen catch-up vaccination across the life course in under-immunized groups is an important next step if we are to meet European and global targets for VPD elimination and control and ensure vaccine equity.
Assuntos
Migrantes , Doenças Preveníveis por Vacina , Humanos , Migrantes/estatística & dados numéricos , Europa (Continente) , Doenças Preveníveis por Vacina/prevenção & controle , Doenças Preveníveis por Vacina/imunologia , Cobertura Vacinal/estatística & dados numéricos , Rubéola (Sarampo Alemão)/prevenção & controle , Rubéola (Sarampo Alemão)/imunologia , Caxumba/prevenção & controle , Caxumba/imunologia , Vacinação/estatística & dados numéricos , Imunidade Coletiva , Sarampo/prevenção & controle , Sarampo/imunologia , Sarampo/epidemiologia , Difteria/prevenção & controle , Difteria/imunologiaRESUMO
Background: Migrants in Europe face a disproportionate burden of undiagnosed infection, including tuberculosis, blood-borne viruses, and parasitic infections and many belong to an under-immunised group. The European Centre for Disease Control (ECDC) has called for innovative strategies to deliver integrated multi-disease screening to migrants within primary care, yet this is poorly implemented in the UK. We did an in-depth qualitative study to understand current practice, barriers and solutions to infectious disease screening in primary care, and to seek feedback on a collaboratively developed digitalised integrated clinical decision-making tool called Health Catch UP!, which supports multi-infection screening for migrant patients. Methods: Two-phase qualitative study of UK primary healthcare professionals, in-depth semi-structured telephone-interviews were conducted. In Phase A, we conducted interviews with clinical staff (general practitioners (GPs), nurses, health-care-assistants (HCAs)); these informed data collection and analysis for phase B (administrative staff). Data were analysed iteratively, using thematic analysis. Results: In phase A, 48 clinicians were recruited (25 GPs, 15 nurses, seven HCAs, one pharmacist) and 16 administrative staff (11 Practice-Managers, five receptionists) in phase B. Respondents were positive about primary care's ability to effectively deliver infectious disease screening. However, we found current infectious disease screening lacks a standardised approach and many practices have no system for screening meaning migrant patients are not always receiving evidence-based care (i.e., NICE/ECDC/UKHSA screening guidelines). Barriers to screening were reported at patient, staff, and system-levels. Respondents reported poor implementation of existing screening initiatives (e.g., regional latent TB screening) citing overly complex pathways that required extensive administrative/clinical time and lacked financial/expert support. Solutions included patient/staff infectious disease champions, targeted training and specialist support, simplified care pathways for screening and management of positive results, and financial incentivisation. Participants responded positively to Health Catch-UP!, stating it would systematically integrate data and support clinical decision-making, increase knowledge, reduce missed screening opportunities, and normalisation of primary care-based infectious disease screening for migrants. Conclusions: Our results suggest that implementation of infectious disease screening in migrant populations is not comprehensively done in UK primary care. Primary health care professionals support the concept of innovative digital tools like Health Catch-UP! and that they could significantly improve disease detection and effective implementation of screening guidance but that they require robust testing and resourcing.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Disparities in the uptake of routine and COVID-19 vaccinations have been observed in migrant populations, and attributed to issues of mistrust, access and low vaccine confidence. Participatory research approaches and behaviour change theory hold the potential for developing tailored vaccination interventions that address these complex barriers in partnership with communities and should be explored further. METHODS: This study used a theory-informed, community-based participatory research approach to co-design a culturally tailored behaviour change intervention aimed at increasing COVID-19 vaccine uptake among Congolese migrants in London, United Kingdom (2021-2022). It was designed and led by a community-academic partnership in response to unmet needs in the Congolese community as the COVID-19 pandemic started. Barriers and facilitators to COVID-19 vaccination, information and communication preferences, and intervention suggestions were explored through qualitative in-depth interviews with Congolese migrants, thematically analysed, and mapped to the theoretical domains framework (TDF) and the capability, opportunity, motivation, behaviour model to identify target behaviours and strategies to include in interventions. Interventions were co-designed and tailored in workshops involving Congolese migrants. RESULTS: Thirty-two Congolese adult migrants (24 (75%) women, mean 14.3 (SD: 7.5) years in the United Kingdom, mean age 52.6 (SD: 11.0) years) took part in in-depth interviews and 16 (same sample) took part in co-design workshops. Fourteen barriers and 10 facilitators to COVID-19 vaccination were identified; most barrier data related to four TDF domains (beliefs about consequences; emotion; social influences and environmental context and resources), and the behavioural diagnosis concluded interventions should target improving psychological capability, reflective and automatic motivations and social opportunities. Strategies included culturally tailored behaviour change techniques based on education, persuasion, modelling, enablement and environmental restructuring, which resulted in a co-designed intervention comprising community-led workshops, plays and posters. Findings and interventions were disseminated through a community celebration event. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates how behavioural theory can be applied to co-designing tailored interventions with underserved migrant communities through a participatory research paradigm to address a range of health issues and inequalities. Future research should build on this empowering approach, with the goal of developing more sensitive vaccination services and interventions which respond to migrant communities' unique cultural needs and realities. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patient and public involvement (PPI) were embedded in the participatory study design and approach, with community members co-producing all stages of the study and co-authoring this paper. An independent PPI board (St George's Migrant Health Research Group Patient and Public Involvement Advisory Board) comprising five adult migrants with lived experience of accessing healthcare in the United Kingdom were also consulted at significant points over the course of the study.
RESUMO
THE PROBLEM: Immigration status is an important social determinant of health that can limit access to health care and related services. Few medical legal partnerships (MLPs) address immigration-related legal needs of patients. PURPOSE OF ARTICLE: An immigrant-focused MLP (IMLP) addresses immigration legal needs and provides advice to vulnerable patient-clients and their families regarding potential legal consequences of accessing health care and other public benefits. In this article, we outline the core elements of an IMLP and provide case examples from our ongoing IMLPs. KEY POINTS: Although many of the core elements of an IMLP are similar to those of an MLP, an IMLP focuses specifically on immigration-related legal needs of patient-clients. IMLPs can complement and extend MLP services by providing legal assistance to non-citizen immigrant individuals and mixed status families. CONCLUSIONS: IMLPs may improve immigrant patient-clients' health and social well-being and create eligibility for public benefits. An IMLP can be a scalable innovation to improve access to health and legal services. Challenges to institutionalizing an IMLP may include limited sustainable funding, few legal service providers with immigration expertise and capacity, patient-client identification, and the politicized nature of immigration.
Assuntos
Pesquisa Participativa Baseada na Comunidade , Emigrantes e Imigrantes , Humanos , Acessibilidade aos Serviços de SaúdeRESUMO
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Some refugee and migrant populations globally showed lower uptake of COVID-19 vaccines and are also considered to be an under-immunized group for routine vaccinations. These communities may experience a range of barriers to vaccination systems, yet there is a need to better explore drivers of under-immunization and vaccine hesitancy in these mobile groups. METHODS: We did a global rapid review to explore drivers of under-immunization and vaccine hesitancy to define strategies to strengthen both COVID-19 and routine vaccination uptake, searching MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health PsycINFO and grey literature. Qualitative data were analysed thematically to identify drivers of under-immunization and vaccine hesitancy, and then categorized using the 'Increasing Vaccination Model'. RESULTS: Sixty-three papers were included, reporting data on diverse population groups, including refugees, asylum seekers, labour migrants and undocumented migrants in 22 countries. Drivers of under-immunization and vaccine hesitancy pertaining to a wide range of vaccines were covered, including COVID-19 (n = 27), human papillomavirus (13), measles or Measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) (3), influenza (3), tetanus (1) and vaccination in general. We found a range of factors driving under-immunization and hesitancy in refugee and migrant groups, including unique awareness and access factors that need to be better considered in policy and service delivery. Acceptability of vaccination was often deeply rooted in social and historical context and influenced by personal risk perception. CONCLUSIONS: These findings hold direct relevance to current efforts to ensure high levels of global coverage for a range of vaccines and to ensure that marginalized refugee and migrant populations are included in the national vaccination plans of low-, middle- and high-income countries. We found a stark lack of research from low- and middle-income and humanitarian contexts on vaccination in mobile groups. This needs to be urgently rectified if we are to design and deliver effective programmes that ensure high coverage for COVID-19 and routine vaccinations.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Vacinas contra Influenza , Sarampo , Refugiados , Migrantes , Humanos , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , Hesitação Vacinal , Vacinação , ImunizaçãoRESUMO
The radiation-attenuated Plasmodium falciparum sporozoites (PfSPZ) Vaccine has demonstrated safety and immunogenicity in 5-month-old to 50-year-old Africans in multiple trials. Except for one, each trial has restricted enrollment to either infants and children or adults < 50 years old. This trial was conducted in Equatorial Guinea and assessed the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of three direct venous inoculations of 1.8 × 106 or 2.7 × 106 PfSPZ, of PfSPZ Vaccine, or normal saline administered at 8-week intervals in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial stratified by age (6-11 months and 1-5, 6-10, 11-17, 18-35, and 36-61 years). All doses were successfully administered. In all, 192/207 injections (93%) in those aged 6-61 years were rated as causing no or mild pain. There were no significant differences in solicited adverse events (AEs) between vaccinees and controls in any age group (P ≥ 0.17). There were no significant differences between vaccinees and controls with respect to the rates or severity of unsolicited AEs or laboratory abnormalities. Development of antibodies to P. falciparum circumsporozoite protein occurred in 67/69 vaccinees (97%) and 0/15 controls. Median antibody levels were highest in infants and 1-5-year-olds and declined progressively with age. Antibody responses in children were greater than in adults protected against controlled human malaria infection. Robust immunogenicity, combined with a benign AE profile, indicates children are an ideal target for immunization with PfSPZ Vaccine.
Assuntos
Vacinas Antimaláricas , Malária Falciparum , Animais , Adulto , Humanos , Criança , Lactente , Pré-Escolar , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Plasmodium falciparum , Malária Falciparum/prevenção & controle , Esporozoítos , Vacinas Atenuadas , Guiné Equatorial , Método Duplo-Cego , Imunogenicidade da VacinaRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Migrants and ethnic minority groups have been disproportionately impacted by COVID-19 and have lower levels of vaccine uptake in some contexts. We aimed to determine the extent and nature of social media use in migrant and ethnic minority communities for COVID-19 information, and implications for preventative health measures including vaccination intent and uptake. DESIGN: A systematic review of published and grey literature following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We searched databases including Embase, Web of Science, PubMed NIH, CINAHL, facilitated through the WHO Global Research on COVID-19 database from 31 December 2019 to 9 June 2021. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION: Research reporting the use of social media by migrants and/or ethnic minority groups in relation to COVID-19. DATA EXTRACTION: We extracted data on key outcomes, study design, country, population under study and sample size. RESULTS: 1849 unique records were screened, and 21 data sources were included, including populations in the UK, USA, China, Jordan, Qatar and Turkey. We found evidence of consistent use of a range of social media platforms for COVID-19 information in some migrant and ethnic minority populations (including WeChat, Facebook, WhatsApp, Instagram, Twitter, YouTube), which may stem from difficulty in accessing COVID-19 information in their native languages or from trusted sources. Some evidence suggested circulating misinformation and social media use may be associated with lower participation in preventative health measures, including vaccine intent and uptake, findings which are likely relevant to multiple population groups. CONCLUSIONS: Social media platforms are an important source of information about COVID-19 for some migrant and ethnic minority populations. Urgent actions and further research are now needed to better understand effective approaches to tackling circulating misinformation, and to seize on opportunities to better use social media platforms to support public health communication and improve vaccine uptake. REGISTRATION: This study has been registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021259190).
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Mídias Sociais , Migrantes , Humanos , Grupos Minoritários , Etnicidade , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Minorias Étnicas e Raciais , Pandemias/prevenção & controleRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Explore primary care professionals' views around barriers/facilitators to catch-up vaccination in adult migrants (foreign-born; over 18 years of age) with incomplete/uncertain vaccination status and for routine vaccines to inform development of interventions to improve vaccine uptake and coverage. DESIGN: Qualitative interview study with purposive sampling and thematic analysis. SETTING: UK primary care. PARTICIPANTS: 64 primary care professionals (PCPs): 48 clinical-staff including general practitioners, practice nurses and healthcare assistants; 16 administrative-staff including practice managers and receptionists (mean age 45 years; 84.4% women; a range of ethnicities). RESULTS: Participants highlighted direct and indirect barriers to catch-up vaccines in adult migrants who may have missed vaccines as children, missed boosters and not be aligned with the UK's vaccine schedule, from both personal and service-delivery levels, with themes including: lack of training and knowledge of guidance among staff; unclear or incomplete vaccine records; and lack of incentivisation (including financial) and dedicated time and care pathways. Adult migrants were reported as being excluded from many vaccination initiatives, most of which focus exclusively on children. Where delivery models existed, they were diverse and fragmented, but included a combination of opportunistic and proactive programmes. PCPs noted that migrants expressed to them a range of views around vaccines, from positivity to uncertainty, to refusal, with specific nationality groups reported as more hesitant about specific vaccines, including measles, mumps and rubella (MMR). CONCLUSIONS: WHO's new Immunization Agenda 2030 calls for greater focus to be placed on delivering vaccination across the life course, targeting underimmunised groups for catch-up vaccination at any age, and UK primary care services therefore have a key role. Vaccine uptake in adult migrants could be improved through implementing new financial incentives or inclusion of adult migrant vaccination targets in Quality Outcomes Framework, strengthening care pathways and training and working directly with local community-groups to improve understanding around the benefits of vaccination at all ages.
Assuntos
Migrantes , Vacinas , Adolescente , Adulto , Criança , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Atenção Primária à Saúde , Pesquisa Qualitativa , Vacina contra Rubéola , Reino Unido , VacinaçãoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: WHO's new Immunization Agenda 2030 places a focus on ensuring migrants and other marginalised groups are offered catch-up vaccinations across the life-course. Yet, it is not known to what extent specific groups, such as refugees, are immunised according to host country schedules, and the implications for policy and practice. We aimed to assess the immunisation coverage of UK-bound refugees undergoing International Organization for Migration (IOM) health assessments through UK resettlement schemes, and calculate risk factors for under-immunisation. METHODS: We undertook a retrospective cross-sectional study of all refugees (children <10 years, adolescents aged 10-19 years, and adults >19 years) in the UK resettlement programme who had at least one migration health assessment conducted by IOM between Jan 1, 2018 and Oct 31, 2019, across 18 countries. Individuals' recorded vaccine coverage was calculated and compared with the UK immunisation schedule and the UK Refugee Technical Instructions. We carried out multivariate logistic regression analyses to assess factors associated with varying immunisation coverage. FINDINGS: Our study included 12 526 refugees of 36 nationalities (median age 17 years [IQR 7-33]; 6147 [49·1%] female; 7955 [63·5%] Syrian nationals). 26 118 vaccine doses were administered by the IOM (most commonly measles, mumps, and rubella [8741 doses]). During the study, 6870 refugees departed for the UK, of whom 5556 (80·9%) had at least one recorded dose of measles-containing vaccine and 5798 (84·4%) had at least one dose of polio vaccine, as per the UK Refugee Technical Instructions, and 1315 (19·1%) had at least one recorded dose of diphtheria-containing vaccine or tetanus-containing vaccine. 764 (11·1%) of refugees were fully aligned with the UK schedule for polio, compared with 2338 (34·0%) for measles and 380 (5·5%) for diphtheria and tetanus. Adults were significantly less likely than children to be in line with the UK immunisation schedule for polio (odds ratio 0·0013, 95% CI 0·0001-0·0052) and measles (0·29, 0·25-0·32). INTERPRETATION: On arrival to the UK, refugees' recorded vaccination coverage is suboptimal and varies by age, nationality, country of health assessment, and by disease, with particularly low coverage reported for diphtheria and tetanus, and among adult refugees. These findings have important implications for the delivery of refugee pre-entry health assessments and catch-up vaccination policy and delivery targeting child, adolescent, and adults migrants in the UK, and other refugee-receiving countries. This research highlights the need for improved data sharing and clearer definition of where responsibilities lie between host countries and health assessment providers. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR300072) and Medical Research Council (MR/N013638/1).
Assuntos
Difteria , Sarampo , Poliomielite , Refugiados , Tétano , Vacinas , Adolescente , Adulto , Criança , Estudos Transversais , Feminino , Humanos , Imunização , Masculino , Sarampo/prevenção & controle , Estudos Retrospectivos , Reino UnidoRESUMO
Understanding why some migrants in Europe are at risk of underimmunisation and show lower vaccination uptake for routine and COVID-19 vaccines is critical if we are to address vaccination inequities and meet the goals of WHO's new Immunisation Agenda 2030. We did a systematic review (PROSPERO: CRD42020219214) exploring barriers and facilitators of vaccine uptake (categorised using the 5As taxonomy: access, awareness, affordability, acceptance, activation) and sociodemographic determinants of undervaccination among migrants in the EU and European Economic Area, the UK, and Switzerland. We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO from 2000 to 2021 for primary research, with no restrictions on language. 5259 data sources were screened, with 67 studies included from 16 countries, representing 366 529 migrants. We identified multiple access barriers-including language, literacy, and communication barriers, practical and legal barriers to accessing and delivering vaccination services, and service barriers such as lack of specific guidelines and knowledge of health-care professionals-for key vaccines including measles-mumps-rubella, diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus, human papillomavirus, influenza, polio, and COVID-19 vaccines. Acceptance barriers were mostly reported in eastern European and Muslim migrants for human papillomavirus, measles, and influenza vaccines. We identified 23 significant determinants of undervaccination in migrants (p<0·05), including African origin, recent migration, and being a refugee or asylum seeker. We did not identify a strong overall association with gender or age. Tailored vaccination messaging, community outreach, and behavioural nudges facilitated uptake. Migrants' barriers to accessing health care are already well documented, and this Review confirms their role in limiting vaccine uptake. These findings hold immediate relevance to strengthening vaccination programmes in high-income countries, including for COVID-19, and suggest that tailored, culturally sensitive, and evidence-informed strategies, unambiguous public health messaging, and health system strengthening are needed to address access and acceptance barriers to vaccination in migrants and create opportunities and pathways for offering catch-up vaccinations to migrants.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Sarampo , Migrantes , Vacinas , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , Europa (Continente) , Acessibilidade aos Serviços de Saúde , Humanos , VacinaçãoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Progress towards malaria elimination has stagnated, partly because infections persisting at low parasite densities comprise a large reservoir contributing to ongoing malaria transmission and are difficult to detect. This study compared the performance of an ultrasensitive rapid diagnostic test (uRDT) designed to detect low density infections to a conventional RDT (cRDT), expert microscopy using Giemsa-stained thick blood smears (TBS), and quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) during a controlled human malaria infection (CHMI) study conducted in malaria exposed adults (NCT03590340). METHODS: Blood samples were collected from healthy Equatoguineans aged 18-35 years beginning on day 8 after CHMI with 3.2 × 103 cryopreserved, infectious Plasmodium falciparum sporozoites (PfSPZ Challenge, strain NF54) administered by direct venous inoculation. qPCR (18s ribosomal DNA), uRDT (Alere™ Malaria Ag P.f.), cRDT [Carestart Malaria Pf/PAN (PfHRP2/pLDH)], and TBS were performed daily until the volunteer became TBS positive and treatment was administered. qPCR was the reference for the presence of Plasmodium falciparum parasites. RESULTS: 279 samples were collected from 24 participants; 123 were positive by qPCR. TBS detected 24/123 (19.5% sensitivity [95% CI 13.1-27.8%]), uRDT 21/123 (17.1% sensitivity [95% CI 11.1-25.1%]), cRDT 10/123 (8.1% sensitivity [95% CI 4.2-14.8%]); all were 100% specific and did not detect any positive samples not detected by qPCR. TBS and uRDT were more sensitive than cRDT (TBS vs. cRDT p = 0.015; uRDT vs. cRDT p = 0.053), detecting parasitaemias as low as 3.7 parasites/µL (p/µL) (TBS and uRDT) compared to 5.6 p/µL (cRDT) based on TBS density measurements. TBS, uRDT and cRDT did not detect any of the 70/123 samples positive by qPCR below 5.86 p/µL, the qPCR density corresponding to 3.7 p/µL by TBS. The median prepatent periods in days (ranges) were 14.5 (10-20), 18.0 (15-28), 18.0 (15-20) and 18.0 (16-24) for qPCR, TBS, uRDT and cRDT, respectively; qPCR detected parasitaemia significantly earlier (3.5 days) than the other tests. CONCLUSIONS: TBS and uRDT had similar sensitivities, both were more sensitive than cRDT, and neither matched qPCR for detecting low density parasitaemia. uRDT could be considered an alternative to TBS in selected applications, such as CHMI or field diagnosis, where qualitative, dichotomous results for malaria infection might be sufficient.
Assuntos
Malária , Plasmodium falciparum , Adolescente , Adulto , Testes Diagnósticos de Rotina/métodos , Guiné Equatorial , Humanos , Plasmodium falciparum/genética , Reação em Cadeia da Polimerase em Tempo Real , Adulto JovemRESUMO
Plasmodium falciparum sporozoites (PfSPZ) Vaccine is composed of radiation-attenuated, aseptic, purified cryopreserved PfSPZ. Multiple clinical trials empirically assessing two to six doses have shown multi-dose priming (-two to four doses the first week) to be optimal for protection in both 4- and 16-week regimens. In this randomized, double-blind, normal saline (NS), placebo-controlled trial, four groups (G) of 18- to 32-year-old Equatoguineans received multi-dose priming regimens with or without a delayed final dose at 4 or 16 weeks (9 × 105 PfSPZ/dose). The regimens were G1: days 1, 3, 5, 7, and 113; G2: days 1, 3, 5, and 7; G3: days 1, 3, 5, 7, and 29; and G4: days 1, 8, and 29). All doses were 9 × 105 PfSPZ. Tolerability, safety, immunogenicity, and vaccine efficacy (VE) against homologous-controlled human malaria infection (CHMI) 6-7 weeks after vaccination were assessed to down-select the best regimen. All four regimens were safe and well tolerated, with no significant differences in adverse events (AEs) between vaccinees (N = 84) and NS controls (N = 20) or between regimens. Out of 19 controls, 13 developed Pf parasitemia by quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) after CHMI. Only the vaccine regimen administered on study days 1, 8, and 29 gave significant protection (7/21 vaccinees versus 13/19 controls infected, VE 51.3%, P = 0.03, Barnard's test, two-tailed). There were no significant differences in antibodies against Pf circumporozoite protein (PfCSP), a major SPZ antigen, between protected and nonprotected vaccinees or controls pre-CHMI. The six controls not developing Pf parasitemia had significantly higher antibodies to blood stage antigens Pf exported protein 1 (PfEXP1) and Pf merozoite surface protein 1 (PfMSP1) than the controls who developed parasitemia, suggesting naturally acquired immunity against Pf-limited infections in controls. This study identified a safe, protective, 4-week, multi-dose prime vaccination regimen for assessment in future trials of PfSPZ Vaccine.