Health promotion strategies toward improved healthcare access for migrants and refugees in Europe: MyHealth recommendations.

MyHealth European project (2017-2020) was committed to elaborate on models to engage vulnerable migrants and refugees (VMR) in their health through community involvement. Low healthcare access and poor quality of healthcare services for VMR is a common reality in many European countries. The purpose of the present study, as part of MyHealth project, was the development of an agenda for actions and consequent recommendations to tackle the issue. A qualitative research design was applied at four study sites in Barcelona, Spain; Berlin, Germany; Brno, Czech Republic and Athens, Greece. The Metaplan® group discussions allowed the collection, organization and process of ideas and opinions elaborated in the collaborative groups. In total, 14 sessions took place: 4 with health and social professionals (n = 41) and 10 with VMR (n = 77). A participatory thematic analysis was performed at every session and overall for all sessions a thematic analysis synthesized the findings. The suggested actions were divided into two levels of recommendations: (i) local authorities at destination country-related, such as the investment in health professionals' cultural competences, and (ii) VMR-related, such as adaptation of help-seeking behavior patterns. Special attention was proposed to women survivors of violence and homeless minors. The study concluded to an agenda for action in Europe. We advocate for a public health paradigm shift where, while holding a bottom-up approach, VMR as well as professionals working with them are actively and meaningfully engaged in the decision-making process of access-enhancing and health promotion strategies in a given socio-cultural context.

Low healthcare access and poor quality of healthcare services for vulnerable migrants and refugees (VMR) is a common reality in many European countries. As part of MyHealth project (2017­2020), a qualitative methodology was used to engage VMR and professionals in the decision-making of proposed actions and corresponding recommendations to address the issue.

Racial/ethnic differences in general physical symptoms and medically unexplained physical symptoms: Investigating the role of education.

OBJECTIVES: Distressing physical symptoms (e.g., back pain, nausea), many of which lack medical explanation, are a common cause for medical help seeking. However, racial/ethnic and educational differences may complicate identification and explanation of such symptoms, potentially contributing to clinician misdiagnosis and patient dissatisfaction. To better understand this issue, we examined racial/ethnic differences in general physical symptoms (GPS) and, more specifically, medically unexplained physical symptoms (MUPS) and whether differences varied by race/ethnicity and educational attainment. METHOD: A sample of 4,864 Latino, Asian, and non-Latino White community respondents (54% female; average age of 41 years) self-reported their GPS. Two experts then rated whether endorsed symptoms were likely to have a medical basis. We assessed the associations of GPS and MUPS with race/ethnicity, age, gender, educational attainment, chronic physical conditions, and past-year psychiatric diagnoses. RESULTS: Asian respondents reported significantly fewer GPS than non-Latino Whites, and both Asian and Latino respondents endorsed significantly fewer MUPS than non-Latino Whites. When nativity and language were each included as covariates, racial/ethnic differences in GPS count were no longer observed; however, observed differences in MUPS count remained. Educational attainment did not demonstrate a significant relationship with either GPS or MUPS. Although comorbid mental health diagnoses were significantly related to both GPS and MUPS, age, gender, and comorbid physical conditions were the only significant predictors of GPS. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this study question existing stereotypical views of racial/ethnic differences in somatization and suggest that educational attainment does not significantly contribute to reported physical symptoms-with or without medical explanation. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Female Genital Mutilation Among Migrants in Spain: Healthcare System Responses and Challenges.

Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting is a human rights violation deeply rooted in gender inequality. The detection of women who have suffered the practice poses a series of challenges in primary healthcare. Intersectoral actions with an intersectional approach can acknowledge the complexity of the issue that can enhance safe and dialogical environments.

Defining indicators for disease burden, health outcomes, policies and barriers and facilitators to health services for migrant populations in the Middle East and North African region: a protocol for a suite of systematic reviews.

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.

Cross-Cultural Validation of the Barcelona Immigration Stress Scale.

The concept of acculturative stress has been the subject of debate, resulting in contradictory arguments regarding its measurement. Many of the existing acculturative stress instruments have been developed for use with specific migrant groups. The objective of the current study is to revisit the psychometric properties of the Barcelona Immigration Stress Scale, an instrument aimed at measuring stress levels associated with the migration trajectory in any migrant group. Using a sample of 915 migrants who consulted in primary care, we carried out principal component and confirmatory factor analyses as well as item response theory analyses applied both to the entire sample and to different migratory groups separately. The new reduced version of the scale has very good psychometric properties both in general and applied to the Latino migratory group, the largest in the area where the study was carried out. Results were acceptable among sub-Saharan, North African, and Asian groups but not among Eastern Europeans. These results are discussed through the specificities of each migratory group and the limitations of psychometrics to capture the complexity of immigration-related and acculturative stress.

Screening and routine diagnosis of mental disorders among migrants in primary care: A cross-sectional study.

Background: Migrants in host countries are at risk for the development of mental health conditions. The two aims of the study were to describe routine diagnoses of mental disorders among migrant patients at primary healthcare level and the associated risk factors, and to test the utility of an innovative migrant mental health assessment by evaluating whether the health professionals followed the recommendations proposed by the clinical decision support system (CDSS) tool. Methods: A cross-sectional study was carried out in eight primary care centres (PCCs) in four non-randomly selected health regions of Catalonia, Spain from March to December 2018. Routine health data and mental health diagnoses based on the International Classification of Diseases (10th edition), including mental, behavioural and neuro developmental disorders (F01-F99), symptoms and signs involving emotional state (R45), and sleep disorders (G47), were extracted from the electronic health records. The proportion of mental health conditions was estimated and logistic regression models were used to assess any possible association with mental health disorders. The utility of the mental health assessment was assessed with the proportion of questionnaires performed by health professionals for migrants fulfilling the mental health screening criterion (country of origin with an active conflict in 2017) and the diagnoses given to the screened patients. Results: Of 14,130 migrants that visited any of the PCCs during the study period, 7,358 (52.1 %) were women with a median age of 38.0 years-old. There were 520/14,130 (3.7 %) migrant patients diagnosed with a mental disorder, being more frequent among women (342/7,358; 4.7 %, p-value < 0.001), migrants from Latin-America (177/3,483; 5.1 %, p < 0.001) and those who recently arrived in Spain (170/3,672; 4.6 %, p < 0.001). A lower proportion of mental disorders were reported in migrants coming from conflicted countries in 2017 (116/3,669, 3.2 %, p = 0.053).Out of the 547 mental health diagnoses reported in 520 patients, 69/14,130 (0.5 %) were mood disorders, 346/14,130 (2.5 %) anxiety disorders and 127/14,130 (0.9 %) sleeping disorders. Mood disorders were more common in migrants from Eastern Europe (25/2,971; 0.8 %, p < 0.001) and anxiety disorders in migrants from Latin-America (126/3,483; 3.6 %, p < 0.001), while both type of disorders were more often reported in women (p < 0.001).In the adjusted model, women (aOR: 1.5, [95 % CI 1.2-1.8, p < 0.001]), migrants with more than one visit to the health center during the study period (aOR: 4.4, [95 %CI 2.8-6.8, p < 0.001]) and who presented an infectious disease (aOR: 2.1, [95 %CI 1.5-3.1, p < 0.001]) had higher odds of having a mental disorder.Lastly, out of the 1,840 migrants coming from a conflicted country in 2017 who were attended in centres where the CDSS tool was implemented, 29 (1.6 %) had a mental health assessment performed and the tool correctly identified one individual. Conclusions: Mental health is a condition that may be overlooked in migrants at primary healthcare. Interventions at this level of care must be reinforced and adapted to the needs and circumstances of migrants to ensure equity in health services.

Usefulness and practicality of a multidisease screening programme targeting migrant patients in primary care in Spain: a qualitative study of general practitioners.

OBJECTIVES: Some migrant groups are disproportionately affected by key infectious diseases in European countries. These pose a challenge for healthcare systems providing care to these groups. We aimed to explore the views of general practitioners (GPs) on the acceptability, adaptability and feasibility of a multidisease screening programme based on an innovative clinical decision-support system for migrants (the ISMiHealth tool), by examining the current gaps in healthcare provision and areas of good practice and the usefulness and limitations of training in the health needs of migrants. METHODS: We undertook a qualitative descriptive study and carried out a series of focus groups (FGs) taking a pragmatic utilitarian approach. Participants were GPs from the four primary healthcare (PHC) centres in Catalonia, Spain, that piloted an intervention of the ISMiHealth tool. GPs were recruited using purposive and convenience sampling. FG discussions were transcribed and analysed using thematic content analysis. RESULTS: A total of 29 GPs participated in four FGs. Key themes identified were: (1) GPs found the ISMiHealth tool to be very useful for helping to identify specific health problems in migrants, although there are several additional barriers to screening as part of PHC, (2) the importance of considering cultural perspectives when caring for migrants, and of the impact of migration on mental health, (3) the important role of PHC in healthcare provision for migrants and (4) key proposals to improve screening of migrant populations. GPs also highlighted the urgent need, to shift to a more holistic and adequately resourced approach to healthcare in PHC. CONCLUSIONS: GPs supported a multidisease screening programme for migrant populations using the ISMiHealth tool, which aided clinical decision-making. However, intercultural participatory approaches will need to be adopted to address linguistic and cultural barriers to healthcare access that exist in migrant communities.

Development of a patient rated scale for mental health global state for use during humanitarian interventions.

OBJECTIVE: We present the results of a cross-cultural validation of the Mental Health Global State (MHGS) scale for adults and adolescents (<14 years old). METHODS: We performed two independent studies using mixed methods among 103 patients in Hebron, Occupied Palestinian Territories and 106 in Cauca, Colombia. The MHGS was analyzed psychometrically, sensitivity and specificity, ability to detect clinically meaningful change, compared to the Clinical Global Impression-Severity scale (CGI-S). Principal component analysis was used to reduce the number of questions after data collection. RESULTS: The scale demonstrated good internal consistency, with a Cronbach alpha score of 0.80 in both settings. Test retest reliability was high, ICC 0.70 (95% CI [0.41-0.85]) in Hebron and 0.87 (95% CI [0.76-0.93]) in Cauca; inter-rater reliability was 0.70 (95% CI [0.42-0.85]) in Hebron and 0.76 (95% CI [0.57-0.88]) in Cauca. Psychometric properties were also good, and the tool demonstrated a sensitivity of 85% in Hebron and 100% in Cauca, with corresponding specificity of 80% and 79%, when compared to CGI-S. CONCLUSIONS: The MHGS showed promising results to assess global mental health thereby providing an additional easy to use tool in humanitarian interventions. Additional work should focus on validation in at least one more context, to adhere to best practices in transcultural validation.

A Cross-Sectional Survey on Professionals to Assess Health Needs of Newly Arrived Migrants in Spain.

Heightened conflicts and lack of safety due to reasons related to economic, social, ethnic, religious, sexual orientation, political, or nationality matters have increased migratory movements during the last, few decades. Unfortunately, when migrants arrive in new territories, they can face many barriers. For example, in Spain, some migrants have difficulties in accessing health services. The main objective of this study was to describe, from the perspective of social and healthcare professionals, health needs and barriers faced among migrants who recently arrived in Spain when accessing the health system. To accomplish this aim, we carried out a cross-sectional descriptive study using a newly created self-administered questionnaire. Statistical analysis was done using the SPSS 23.00® program. Survey collection was from April 2018 to October 2018, and the cohort comprised a total of 228 professionals. Most participants were females (76%), with an average age of 35 years [interquartile range (IQR) 29.8-43.0]. The most represented profession in the cohort was physician (48%), followed by social care professionals (32%), nursing (11%), and other (8%). Of these individuals, 61% stated having either little or limited knowledge of international migrant health rights, and 94% believed migrants must overcome barriers to receive health services. The four most reported barriers were as follows: language, cultural differences, administrative issues, and fear of being undocumented. Additionally, by order of importance, professionals viewed mental health disorders and infectious diseases as the most common contributors to disease burden in this group. The four most popular strategies implemented by professionals to improve healthcare access further for migrants included intercultural competency training for professionals; access to community health agents; access to translators; and development of health system navigation skills among those newly arrived. Study results suggest that governments should make greater efforts to provide social and healthcare professionals with more effective tools that overcome communication barriers and cultural competence training modules.

The effects of exercise interventions on quality of life in clinical and healthy populations; a meta-analysis.

The aim of the study was to provide an overview of the effect of exercise interventions on subjective quality of life (QoL) across adult clinical populations and well people, and to systematically investigate the impact of the exercise setting, intensity and type on these outcomes. From a systematic search of six electronic databases, 56 original studies were extracted, reporting on 7937 sick and well people. A meta-analysis was conducted on change in QoL from pre- to post-intervention compared with outcomes from a no-exercise control group, using weighted (by the study's sample size) pooled mean effect sizes and a fixed-effects model. Significant differences in outcome were found when treatment purpose was compared; prevention/promotion (well populations), rehabilitation, or disease management. Three to 6 months post-baseline, a moderate positive effect of exercise interventions was found for overall QoL in rehabilitation patients, but no significant effect for well or disease management groups. However, physical and psychological QoL domains improved significantly relative to controls in well participants. Psychological QoL was significantly poorer relative to controls in the disease management group. This pattern of results persisted over 1 year. With some exceptions, better overall QoL was reported for light intensity exercise undertaken in group settings, with greater improvement in physical QoL following moderate intensity exercise. The implications for future health care practice and research are discussed.