Dataset Information

Healthcare access for children and families on the move and migrants.

ABSTRACT: Background:The United Kingdom (UK) National Health Service (NHS) charging regulations have increasingly restricted migrants' healthcare access, in the context of a wider national policy shift over the past few years intending to create a 'hostile environment' for migrants. With an estimated 144 000 undocumented children living in the UK and increasing public concern that these regulations are negatively impacting migrant health and well-being, as well as contravening international child rights agreements, it has become imperative to understand their implications. Methods:A mixed methods digital survey, covering attitudes towards and understanding of UK healthcare charging, and giving space for relevant case submission, was disseminated through communications channels of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (RCPCH) to their members. Quantitative data were analysed on Stata, and basic proportions were calculated for each response proportion. Qualitative data were analysed using a framework analysis approach. Results:There were 200 responses, from a range of healthcare professional backgrounds. The majority were not confident in interpreting and applying the charging regulations. One-third (34%) reported examples of the charging regulations impacting patient care, analysis of which elicited seven key themes. Our survey gathered 18 cases of migrants being deterred from accessing healthcare, 11 cases of healthcare being delayed or denied outright, and 12 cases of delay in accessing care leading to worse health outcomes, including two intrauterine deaths. Discussion:Our results describe a range of harms arising from the current NHS charging regulations contributing to delays in or denials of healthcare, due to patients' fear of charging or immigration enforcement, including potential deportation, and confusion around entitlements. This harm affects individual patients, the migrant community and the NHS - often in multiple simultaneous ways. Many patients eligible for NHS care, such as trafficking victims, are not being identified as such. We found the current charging regulations to be unworkable, and that harm could not be eliminated simply through improved awareness or implementation.

SUBMITTER: Murphy L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7213513 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesIn 2018, Spain adopted a national law that significantly expanded healthcare access to all residents, including undocumented migrants. This was a substantial shift from a more restrictive system of coverage in previous years. However, irregular migrants continue to experience challenges accessing healthcare in Spain. This study aimed to describe the legislative and administrative barriers to implementation of this law from the perspective of providers and administrators of the healthcare system.DesignWe interviewed 12 individuals using a semistructured format.SettingSpain.Participants12 participants were interviewed; 7 males, 5 females. Participants included Spanish healthcare workers, government officials, hospital administrators, individuals working with non-governmental organisations focused on the provision of healthcare, and experts studying healthcare for underserved populations.Primary and secondary outcome measuresInterviews delved into personal experiences and knowledge of the entitlements and barriers of providing or trying to access care for undocumented migrants.ResultsThe interviews yielded eight key themes: (1) context of universal healthcare in Spain pre-2012; (2) erosion of trust as rationale for more restrictive policies of 2012; (3) challenges of the 3-month residency requirement; (4) areas of ambiguity: exceptions in the 2012 Royal Decree Law not discussed in the 2018 Royal Decree Law; (5) jurisdictional authority and conflicts between national and AC government; (6) near impossibility of obtaining documentation for exportation of healthcare; (7) difficulties obtaining necessary paperwork to register residency; and (8) rise of NGOs to provide support to irregular migrants.ConclusionWhile there has been a general political movement to expand healthcare access for undocumented migrants in Spain, there remains a fundamental need to clarify the legal entitlements for undocumented migrants nationally and create administrative consistency across autonomous communities for providing health cards for undocumented migrants. Other countries may be able to draw lessons from the Spanish experience about the legislative frameworks surrounding access to healthcare for undocumented migrants.

Project description:ImportanceAn increasing diversity of children's health coverage options under the US Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, together with uncertainty regarding reauthorization of the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) beyond 2017, merits renewed attention on the quality of these options for children.ObjectiveTo compare health care access, quality, and cost outcomes by insurance type (Medicaid, CHIP, private, and uninsured) for children in households with low to moderate incomes.Design, setting, and participantsA repeated cross-sectional analysis was conducted using data from the 2003, 2007, and 2011-2012 US National Surveys of Children's Health, comprising 80,655 children 17 years or younger, weighted to 67 million children nationally, with household incomes between 100% and 300% of the federal poverty level. Multivariable logistic regression models compared caregiver-reported outcomes across insurance types. Analysis was conducted between July 14, 2014, and May 6, 2015.ExposuresInsurance type was ascertained using a caregiver-reported measure of insurance status and each household's poverty status (percentage of the federal poverty level).Main outcomes and measuresCaregiver-reported outcomes related to access to primary and specialty care, unmet needs, out-of-pocket costs, care coordination, and satisfaction with care.ResultsAmong the 80,655 children, 51,123 (57.3%) had private insurance, 11,853 (13.6%) had Medicaid, 9554 (18.4%) had CHIP, and 8125 (10.8%) were uninsured. In a multivariable logistic regression model (with results reported as adjusted probabilities [95% CIs]), children insured by Medicaid and CHIP were significantly more likely to receive a preventive medical (Medicaid, 88% [86%-89%]; P < .01; CHIP, 88% [87%-89%]; P < .01) and dental (Medicaid, 80% [78%-81%]; P < .01; CHIP, 77% [76%-79%]; P < .01) visits than were privately insured children (medical, 83% [82%-84%]; dental, 73% [72%-74%]). Children with all insurance types experienced challenges in access to specialty care, with caregivers of children insured by CHIP reporting the highest rates of difficulty accessing specialty care (28% [24%-32%]), problems obtaining a referral (23% [18%-29%]), and frustration obtaining health care services (26% [23%-28%]). These challenges were also magnified for privately insured children with special health care needs, whose caregivers reported significantly greater problems accessing specialty care (29% [26%-33%]) and frustration obtaining health care services (36% [32%-41%]) than did caregivers of children insured by Medicaid, and a lower likelihood of insurance always meeting the child's needs (63% [60%-67%]) than children insured by Medicaid or CHIP. Caregivers of privately insured children were also significantly more likely to experience out-of-pocket costs (77% [75%-78%]) than were caregivers of children insured by Medicaid (26% [23%-28%]; P < .01) or CHIP (38% [35%-40%]; P < .01).Conclusions and relevanceThis examination of caregiver experiences across insurance types revealed important differences that can help guide future policymaking regarding coverage for families with low to moderate incomes.

Dataset Information

Healthcare access for children and families on the move and migrants.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets