Dataset Information

Immigrant health access in Texas: policy, rhetoric, and fear in the Trump era.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Since the 2016 presidential election, reports have suggested that President Trump's rhetoric and his administration's proposed policies could be exacerbating barriers to accessing health care for undocumented as well as lawfully present immigrants and their families in the United States. However, very little empirical work has analyzed this possibility or detailed how these reports and rhetoric have altered the health seeking behavior of mixed immigration status families.

Methods

Using a series of focus groups throughout Texas in both English and Spanish, this qualitative study analyzes changes to health access for immigrants. We consulted Community Health Workers to better understand the barriers encountered by their otherwise hard-to-reach undocumented clients and their families as they interface with the health system, revealing key insights about the changing nature of barriers to access under the Trump administration.

Results

We identify four key themes about the changing nature of immigrant health access in the United States: growing fear of interacting with health and social services; that social networks are paradoxically limiting health access in the current political climate; that the administration's rhetoric and proposed policies are impeding health seeking behavior; and that children are encountering new barriers to social program participation.

Conclusions

The Trump administration, its proposed immigration policies, and his rhetoric are posing new and significant barriers to health access for immigrants and their families.

SUBMITTER: Callaghan T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6549327 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Immigrant health access in Texas: policy, rhetoric, and fear in the Trump era.

Callaghan Timothy T Washburn David J DJ Nimmons Katharine K Duchicela Delia D Gurram Anoop A Burdine James J

BMC health services research 20190605 1

<h4>Background</h4>Since the 2016 presidential election, reports have suggested that President Trump's rhetoric and his administration's proposed policies could be exacerbating barriers to accessing health care for undocumented as well as lawfully present immigrants and their families in the United States. However, very little empirical work has analyzed this possibility or detailed how these reports and rhetoric have altered the health seeking behavior of mixed immigration status families.<h4>M ...[more]

PMID: 31164114

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To assess whether recent anti-immigration rhetoric is significantly associated with inadequate prenatal care. METHODS:This was a population-based cohort study (2011-2017). In their native language, patients were consented and queried regarding country of origin and time in the United States. Additional variables were collected or abstracted from the medical record, including documentation and timing of prenatal visits. Based on relevance and prevalence during the study period, publicly available Google search trends were mined for the terms "Make America Great Again," "Mexico Wall," and "Deportation" by geographic region. The time of first deviation from the mode Google search popularity value for each term was ascertained (mode inflection date). Perinatal data was averaged over 15 days moving windows, and the Adequacy of Prenatal Care Utilization Index was used to categorically define inadequate prenatal care by validated standards. RESULTS:Twenty-four thousand nine hundred thirty-three deliveries occurred during the study period. A mode inflection date was extrapolated from Google trend analytics and used to define the period before change in trends use pre (before rhetoric) and post (after rhetoric). Coincident to the rhetoric change, there was a significant increase in days until the first prenatal visit, fewer prenatal visits, and a decreased trend of mean hemoglobin nadir among U.S. non-native Hispanic women (P<.001). Immigrant status was an independent predictor of inadequate prenatal care as defined by the Adequacy of Prenatal Care Utilization Index standard, with increased adjusted odds among Hispanic women (adjusted odds ratio 1.581, 95% CI 1.407-1.777 [1.4-1.8]) coincident with anti-immigration rhetoric. CONCLUSION:Our findings are of likely significant public health importance and suggest that recent anti-immigrant rhetoric is associated with adequate, timely, and regular access to prenatal care among nearly 25,000 deliveries in Houston, Texas.

Project description:BackgroundAs the world is becoming increasingly connected by the World Wide Web, the internet is becoming the main source of health information. With the novel COVID-19 pandemic, ubiquitous use of the internet has changed the daily lives of individuals, from working from home to seeking and meeting with health care providers through web-based sites. Such heavy reliance on internet-based technologies raises concerns regarding the accessibility of the internet for minority populations who are likely to already face barriers when seeking health information.ObjectiveThis study aims to examine the level of technology access and common modes of technology used by Korean American women and to investigate how key psychosocial determinants of health such as age, education, English proficiency, and health literacy are correlated with sources of health information used by Korean American women and by their use of the internet.MethodsWe used data from a subsample of Korean American women (N=157) who participated in a community-based randomized trial designed to test a health literacy-focused cancer screening intervention. In addition to descriptive statistics to summarize Korean American women's internet access and common modes of technology use, we conducted backward stepwise logistic regression analyses to substantiate the association between the psychosocial determinants of health and internet use.ResultsApproximately two-thirds (103/157, 65.6%) of the sample had access to the internet, and nearly all had access to a mobile phone. The internet was the most commonly used channel to obtain health information 63% (99/157), and 70% (110/157) of the sample used text messaging. Nevertheless, only approximately 38.8% (40/103) of the sample were very confident in using the internet, and only 29.9% (47/157) were very confident in using text messaging. Multivariate analyses revealed that older age (>50 years) was associated with 79% lower odds of using the internet to seek health information (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.21, 95% CI 0.10-0.46). The higher health literacy group (19+ on Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine) had 56% lower odds of using the internet to acquire health information (AOR 0.44, 95% CI 1.13-11.18). Higher education (college+) was associated with both internet use (AOR 4.42, 95% CI 1.88-9.21) and text messaging (AOR 3.42, 95% CI 1.55-7.54). Finally, English proficiency was associated with text messaging (AOR 4.20, 95% CI 1.44-12.24).ConclusionsThe differences in modes of technology access, use, and confidence by some of the key psychosocial determinants, as observed in our study sample, have important implications when health care teams develop dissemination plans.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The objective of this research is to analyse trends in horizontal inequity in access to public health services by immigration condition in Spain throughout the period 2006-2017. We focus on "economic immigrants" because they are potentially the most vulnerable group amongst immigrants. METHODS:Based on the National Health Surveys of 2006-07 (N?=?29,478), 2011-12 (N?=?20,884) and 2016-17 (N?=?22,903), hierarchical logistic regressions with random effects in Spain's autonomous communities are estimated to explain the probability of using publicly-financed health care services by immigrant condition, controlling by health care need and other socioeconomic and demographic variables. RESULTS:Our results indicate that there are several horizontal inequities, though they changed throughout the decade studied. Regarding primary care services, the period starts (2006-07) with no global evidence of horizontal inequity in access (although the analysis by continent shows inequity that is detrimental to Eastern Europeans and Asians), giving way to inequity favouring economic immigrants (particularly Latin Americans and Africans) in 2011-12 and 2016-17. An opposite trend happens with specialist care, as the period starts (2006-07) with evidence of inequity that is detrimental to economic immigrants (particularly those from North of Africa) but this inequity disappears with the economic crisis and after it (with the only exception of Eastern Europeans in 2011-12, whose probability to visit a specialist is lower than for natives). Regarding emergency care, our evidence indicates horizontal inequity in access that favours economic immigrants (particularly Latin Americans and North Africans) that remains throughout the period. In general, there is no inequity in hospitalisations, with the exception of 2011-12, where inequity in favour of economic immigrants (particularly those from Latin America) takes place. CONCLUSIONS:The results obtained here may serve, firstly, to prevent alarm about negative discrimination of economic immigrants in their access to public health services, even after the implementation of the Royal Decree RD Law 16/2012. Conversely, our results suggest that the horizontal inequity in access to specialist care that was found to be detrimental to economic immigrants in 2006-07, disappeared in global terms in 2011-12 and also by continent of origin in 2016-17.

Project description:South Africa, as an emerging middle-income country, is becoming increasingly influential in global health diplomacy (GHD). However, little empirical research has been conducted to inform arguments for the integration of domestic health into foreign policy by state and non-state actors. This study seeks to address this knowledge gap. It takes the form of an empirical case study which analyses how South Africa integrates domestic health into its foreign policy, using the lens of access to antiretroviral (ARV) medicines.To explore state and non-state actors' perceptions regarding how domestic health policy is integrated into foreign policy. The ultimate goal of this study was to achieve better insights into the health and foreign policy processes at the national level.Employing qualitative approaches, we examined changes in the South African and global AIDS policy environment. Purposive sampling was used to select key informants, a sample of state and non-state actors who participated in in-depth interviews. Secondary data were collected through a systematic literature review of documents retrieved from five electronic databases, including review of key policy documents. Qualitative data were analysed for content. This content was coded, and the codes were collated into tentative categories and sub-categories using Atlas.ti v.7 software.The findings of this work illustrate the interplay among social, political, economic and institutional conditions in determining the success of this integration process. Our study shows that a series of national and external developments, stakeholders, and advocacy efforts and collaboration created these integrative processes. South Africa's domestic HIV/AIDS constituencies, in partnership with the global advocacy movement, catalysed the mobilization of support for universal access to ARV treatment nationally and globally, and the promotion of access to healthcare as a human right.Transnational networks may influence government's decision making by providing information and moving issues up the agenda.

Dataset Information

Immigrant health access in Texas: policy, rhetoric, and fear in the Trump era.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Immigrant health access in Texas: policy, rhetoric, and fear in the Trump era.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure