Dataset Information

A Systematic Review of Medical-Legal Partnerships Serving Immigrant Communities in the United States.

ABSTRACT: The medical-legal partnership addresses social and political determinants of health. Yet, relatively little is known about best practices for these two service providers collaborating to deliver integrated services, particularly to im/migrant communities. To investigate evaluations of existing medical-legal partnerships in order to understand how they function together, what they provide, and how they define and deliver equitable, integrated care. We searched five databases (PubMed, Medline, Web of Science, HeinOnline, and Nexus Uni) using search terms related to "medical-legal partnerships", "migrants", and "United States". We systematically evaluated ten themes related to how medical and legal teams interacted, were situated, organized, and who they served. Articles were published in English between 2010 and 2019; required discussion about a direct partnership between medical and legal professionals; and focused on providing clinical care and legal services to im/migrant populations. Eighteen articles met our inclusion criteria. The most common form of partnership was a model in which legal clinics make regular referrals to medical clinics, although the reverse was also common. Most services were not co-located. Partnerships often engaged in advocacy work, provided translation services, and referred clients to non-medical providers and legal services. This review demonstrates the benefits of a legal-medical partnership, such as enhancing documentation and care for im/migrants and facilitating a greater attention to political determinants of health. Yet, this review demonstrates that, despite the increasing salience of such partnership, few have written up their lessons learned and best practices.

SUBMITTER: League A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7518399 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A Systematic Review of Medical-Legal Partnerships Serving Immigrant Communities in the United States.

League Avery A Donato Katharine M KM Sheth Nima N Selden Elizabeth E Patel Sheetal S Cooper Laurie Ball LB Mendenhall Emily E

Journal of immigrant and minority health 20200925 1

The medical-legal partnership addresses social and political determinants of health. Yet, relatively little is known about best practices for these two service providers collaborating to deliver integrated services, particularly to im/migrant communities. To investigate evaluations of existing medical-legal partnerships in order to understand how they function together, what they provide, and how they define and deliver equitable, integrated care. We searched five databases (PubMed, Medline, Web ...[more]

PMID: 32978741

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background:Medical-legal partnerships integrate lawyers into health care to identify and address legal problems that can create and perpetuate disparities in health for patients and their families. They have previously been utilised for patients who are at high-risk of being disadvantaged such as the elderly, the disabled and those affected by chronic diseases. We have used a partnership to address the legal needs of patients with acute, critical illness including major trauma. Method:In 2007, a free, comprehensive legal advice service was established at University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust. The service is bound by strict guidelines which have been endorsed by NHS England. The legal service is specifically prevented from acting against the NHS. A retrospective analysis of the service over a period of 11 years was undertaken to look at the range of legal advice sought. Where a potential compensation claim against a third party was identified, the percentage of cases where the legal service was instructed was noted and the outcome for those cases was examined in further detail. Results:Five hundred and fifty-one patients and or their families have been referred to the legal service. Of these, 343 had sustained major trauma. Over 2300?hours of free legal advice were provided on non-compensation issues, primarily related to welfare benefits, local authority assistance, obtaining power of attorney or seeking Deputyship from the Court of Protection and claims against existing insurance policies. Two hundred and seventy-five of the 551 patients (50%) were found to have a potential compensation claim against a third party. The legal service was instructed to pursue a claim in 82 cases. Interim payments of nearly £13 million were provided and £128 million of compensation has been awarded in 51 cases that have been settled. Discussion:Medical-legal partnerships are well-established in the USA. We have demonstrated that in UK, there is a demand for early legal advice for patients who have sustained critical illness including major trauma. More data are required to identify the rehabilitation outcomes for patients who have received legal support. A similar medical-legal partnership should be considered at every acute NHS Trust.

Project description:BackgroundThe civil war between the indigenous Mayans and other Guatemalans lasted for 36 years, killed civilians, decimated villages, and resulted in many refugees. The Guatemalan Peace Agreement of 1996 aimed to alleviate the ongoing conflict. Studies of peace agreements more typically evaluate local political outcomes while neglecting global health outcomes.ObjectiveOur research quantified associations between pre-migration exposure to the peace agreement in Guatemala and the post-migration health status of Guatemalan immigrants in the United States.MethodsWe used chi-square tests to compare the distribution of health status before and after peace. We used ordered probit regressions to estimate associations between peace in Guatemala and health in the United States, conditional on the observed distributions of age, age squared, age cubed, and linear time trends before and after peace.FindingsThe study sample included 4,115 female and 5,282 male Guatemalan immigrants between the ages of 15 and 85. The mean age was 38.8 years for females (standard deviation, 14.2) and 35.4 years for males (standard deviation, 12.6). Chi-square tests found statistically significant differences in the distribution of health status before and after the peace agreement, for females (P < .001) and males (P < .001). In unadjusted results, the peace agreement was associated with a 7.3 percentage point increase in excellent post-migration health for females (95% confidence interval, 4.9 to 9.8) and a 6.0 percentage point increase for males (95% confidence interval, 3.8 to 8.2). In adjusted results, we found that the peace agreement was associated with a 6.1 percentage point increase in excellent post-migration health for females (95% confidence interval, 0.8 to 11.4) and a 5.5-percentage point increase for males (95% confidence interval, 1.0 to 10.0).ConclusionsThe peace agreement in Guatemala was associated with statistically significant improvements in the health status of Guatemalan immigrants to the United States.

Project description:BackgroundPolicymakers and regulators in the United States (US) and the European Union (EU) are weighing reforms to their medical device approval and post-market surveillance systems. Data may be available that identify strengths and weakness of the approaches to medical device regulation in these settings.Methods and findingsWe performed a systematic review to find empirical studies evaluating medical device regulation in the US or EU. We searched Medline using two nested categories that included medical devices and glossary terms attributable to the US Food and Drug Administration and the EU, following PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews. We supplemented this search with a review of the US Government Accountability Office online database for reports on US Food and Drug Administration device regulation, consultations with local experts in the field, manual reference mining of selected articles, and Google searches using the same key terms used in the Medline search. We found studies of premarket evaluation and timing (n?=?9), studies of device recalls (n?=?8), and surveys of device manufacturers (n?=?3). These studies provide evidence of quality problems in pre-market submissions in the US, provide conflicting views of device safety based largely on recall data, and relay perceptions of some industry leaders from self-surveys.ConclusionsFew studies have quantitatively assessed medical device regulation in either the US or EU. Existing studies of US and EU device approval and post-market evaluation performance suggest that policy reforms are necessary for both systems, including improving classification of devices in the US and promoting transparency and post-market oversight in the EU. Assessment of regulatory performance in both settings is limited by lack of data on post-approval safety outcomes. Changes to these device approval and post-marketing systems must be accompanied by ongoing research to ensure that there is better assessment of what works in either setting.

Project description:AimsTo conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies in order to estimate the effect of US medical marijuana laws (MMLs) on past-month marijuana use prevalence among adolescents.MethodsA total of 2999 papers from 17 literature sources were screened systematically. Eleven studies, developed from four ongoing large national surveys, were meta-analyzed. Estimates of MML effects on any past-month marijuana use prevalence from included studies were obtained from comparisons of pre-post MML changes in MML states to changes in non-MML states over comparable time-periods. These estimates were standardized and entered into a meta-analysis model with fixed-effects for each study. Heterogeneity among the study estimates by national data survey was tested with an omnibus F-test. Estimates of effects on additional marijuana outcomes, of MML provisions (e.g. dispensaries) and among demographic subgroups were abstracted and summarized. Key methodological and modeling characteristics were also described. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed.ResultsNone of the 11 studies found significant estimates of pre-post MML changes compared with contemporaneous changes in non-MML states for marijuana use prevalence among adolescents. The meta-analysis yielded a non-significant pooled estimate (standardized mean difference) of -0.003 (95% confidence interval = -0.012, +0.007). Four studies compared MML with non-MML states on pre-MML differences and all found higher rates of past-month marijuana use in MML states pre-MML passage. Additional tests of specific MML provisions, of MML effects on additional marijuana outcomes and among subgroups generally yielded non-significant results, although limited heterogeneity may warrant further study.ConclusionsSynthesis of the current evidence does not support the hypothesis that US medical marijuana laws (MMLs) until 2014 have led to increases in adolescent marijuana use prevalence. Limited heterogeneity exists among estimates of effects of MMLs on other patterns of marijuana use, of effects within particular population subgroups and of effects of specific MML provisions.

Dataset Information

A Systematic Review of Medical-Legal Partnerships Serving Immigrant Communities in the United States.

Publications

A Systematic Review of Medical-Legal Partnerships Serving Immigrant Communities in the United States.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets