Dataset Information

What are the challenges in the vaccination of migrants in Norway from healthcare provider perspectives? A qualitative, phenomenological study.

ABSTRACT: Background: Migrant populations in the European Union (EU) suffer a disproportionate burden of infectious diseases and may be particularly vulnerable due to poor conditions in countries of origin or throughout transit to the host country. Given the rising level of migration into Europe, the vaccination of migrant populations has become a key priority, with European countries committing to equitably extending the benefits of vaccination to all. However, in Norway, little is known about the vaccination of migrant populations.

Objective: The aim of this qualitative research study was to explore the process of vaccinating migrant populations in Norway and elucidate any challenges as perceived by healthcare providers. This involved exploring the challenges faced by healthcare providers in delivering vaccinations to migrants as well as potential barriers faced by migrants in accessing vaccinations in Norway, from the perspectives of healthcare providers.

Methods: In June 2019, the authors conducted semi-structured interviews with seven healthcare providers who are involved in vaccinating migrants in South-Eastern and Western Norway. This included healthcare providers working in general practice, public health and infectious disease clinics, migrant health clinics, and local public health institutes.

Results: An inductive, exploratory analysis identified key themes that were reviewed and analysed in light of existing literature. According to the informants, the Childhood Immunisation Programme is effective in including migrant children within the national vaccination schedule. However, gaps in vaccination appear to exist with regards to adult migrants as well as working migrants. There is currently no consistent or structured approach to vaccinating adult migrants in Norway, including no guidelines from governing bodies on how to organise vaccination to adult migrants in municipalities. Furthermore, reasons why adult vaccination is not prioritised were provided, such as tuberculosis screening and treatment taking precedence and the common assumption among healthcare providers that vaccinations are dealt with in childhood.

Conclusion: The development of equitable immunisation programmes requires an understanding of the multifactorial barriers to immunisation, such as those posed by policies, structures and governance bodies, or lack thereof. It also entails understanding the administration of such policies and the perspectives of those who are responsible for the delivery of vaccination, namely healthcare providers. This qualitative research study demonstrated that challenges exist in the vaccination of migrants in Norway and that they are coherent with those experienced throughout the EU, principally the presence of gaps in vaccinating adult migrants, working migrants and internal EU migrants. This research provides direction for future investigations and highlights the need for the inclusion of migrant status in the Norwegian Immunisation Registry.

SUBMITTER: Socha A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7689063 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

What are the challenges in the vaccination of migrants in Norway from healthcare provider perspectives? A qualitative, phenomenological study.

Socha Anna A Klein Jörn J

BMJ open 20201124 11

<h4>Background</h4>Migrant populations in the European Union (EU) suffer a disproportionate burden of infectious diseases and may be particularly vulnerable due to poor conditions in countries of origin or throughout transit to the host country. Given the rising level of migration into Europe, the vaccination of migrant populations has become a key priority, with European countries committing to equitably extending the benefits of vaccination to all. However, in Norway, little is known about the ...[more]

PMID: 33234649

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:BackgroundPoor medication adherence is an extraordinarily common problem worldwide that contributes to inadequate control of many chronic diseases, including Hypertension (HT). Globally, less than 14% of the estimated 1.4 billion patients with HT achieve optimal control. A myriad of barriers, across patient, healthcare provider, and system levels, contributes to poor medication adherence. Few studies have explored the reasons for poor medication adherence in Tanzania and other African countries.MethodsA qualitative study applying grounded theory principles was conducted in the catchment area of two semi-urban clinics in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, to determine the perceived barriers to HT medication adherence. Ten key informant interviews were conducted with healthcare providers who manage HT patients. Patients diagnosed with HT (SBP ≥ 140 and DBP ≥ 90), were randomly selected from patient registers, and nine focus group discussions were conducted with a total 34 patients. Inductive codes were developed separately for the two groups, prior to analyzing key thematic ideas with smaller sub-categories.ResultsAffordability of antihypertensive medication and access to care emerged as the most important barriers. Fee subsidies for treatment and medication, along with health insurance, were mentioned as potential solutions to enhance access and adherence. Patient education and quality of physician counseling were mentioned by both providers and patients as major barriers to medication adherence, as most patients were unaware of their HT and often took medications only when symptomatic. Use of local herbal medicines was mentioned as an alternative to medications, as they were inexpensive, available, and culturally acceptable. Patient recommendations for improving adherence included community-based distribution of refills, SMS text reminders, and family support. Reliance on religious leaders over healthcare providers emerged as a potential means to promote adherence in some discussions.ConclusionsEffective management of hypertensive patients for medication adherence will require several context-specific measures. These include policy measures addressing financial access, with medication subsidies for the poor and accessible distribution systems for medication refill; physician measures to improve health provider counseling for patient centric care; and patient-level strategies with reminders for medication adherence in low resource settings.

Project description:BackgroundMistrust and conflicts in patient-provider relationships (PPR) have become prevalent in China. The frequency of verbal and physical violence against healthcare workers has been increasing, but few interventions seem to be effective. Limited prior research has focused on the perspectives of healthcare professionals in training. This paper aimed to understand their viewpoints and conceptualize potentially actionable areas for future policy interventions.MethodsWe analyzed de-identified training registration data of a convenience sample of 151 healthcare students and 38 junior professionals from 20 provinces in China. One open-ended question in the registration form asked the participant to comment on PPRs in China. We used qualitative thematic coding to analyze the narrative data. All answers were categorized into three overarching frames: patients, providers, and external agencies/regulations. Frequently mentioned themes in each frame were evaluated to generate an overall theoretical framework.FindingsAlthough fewer than 25% indicated that current PPRs are "good" or acceptable, 98% of respondents were optimistic about the future improvement of these relationships. The leading factors of PPRs mentioned as patient-relevant were eroding trust in the physician, unrealistic expectations, and ineffective communication. The provider-relevant themes highlighted were poor service quality, ineffective communication, and heavy workload. Leading themes relevant to external agencies or regulations were dysfunctional administration system, negative media reports, and disparity in healthcare resource distribution.InterpretationHealthcare professionals in training had a negative view of the current situation but had confidence in future improvement. Patient, provider, and societal factors all contributed to the tension between patients and providers. All aspects of the healthcare sector should be carefully considered when contemplating policy or social interventions to improve the patient-provider relationship.

Project description:"Undetectable equals Untransmittable", or U=U, is a public health message designed to reduce HIV stigma and help communicate the scientific consensus that HIV cannot be sexually transmitted when a person living with HIV has an undetectable viral load. Between October 2020-February 2021 we conducted 11 in-depth interviews and 3 focus groups with diverse HIV/STI service providers (nurses, public health workers, physicians, frontline providers, and sexual health educators) in Ontario, Canada (n = 18). Our objective was to understand how U=U was communicated to sexual health service users in healthcare interactions. Interview questions were embedded in a larger study focused on improving access to HIV/STI testing. Transcripts were transcribed verbatim and analysed following grounded theory. Most providers emphasized the significance of U=U as a biomedical advancement in HIV prevention but had some challenges communicating U=U in everyday practice. We discovered four interrelated barriers when communicating the U=U message: (1) provider-perceived challenges with "zero risk" messaging (e.g., wanting to "leave a margin" of HIV risk); (2) service users not interested in receiving sexual health information (e.g., in order to provide "client centered care" some providers do not share U=U messages if service users are only interested in HIV/STI testing or if other discussions must be prioritized); (3) skepticism and HIV stigma from service users (e.g., providers explained how the hesitancy of some service users accepting the U=U message was shaped by a legacy of HIV prevention messages and persistent HIV stigma); and (4) need for more culturally appropriate resources (e.g., communities other than sexual and gender minority men; non-English speaking service users; that account for broader legal context). We discuss ways to overcome barriers to communicating the U=U message as well as the limitations and potential unintended consequences of U=U framings in the context of unequal access to HIV prevention and treatment.

Project description:BackgroundVaccination is key to reducing the spread and impacts of COVID-19 and other infectious diseases. Migrants, compared to majority populations, tend to have lower vaccination rates, as well as higher infection disease burdens. Previous studies have tried to understand these disparities based on factors such as misinformation, vaccine hesitancy or medical mistrust. However, the necessary precondition of receiving, or recognizing receipt, of an offer to get a vaccine must also be considered.MethodsWe conducted a web-based survey in six parishes in Oslo that have a high proportion of migrant residents and were hard-hit during the COVID-19 pandemic. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to investigate differences in reporting being offered the COVID-19 vaccine based on migrant status. Different models controlling for vaccination prioritization variables (age, underlying health conditions, and health-related jobs), socioeconomic and demographic variables, and variables specific to migrant status (language spoken at home and years lived in Norway) were conducted.ResultsResponses from 5,442 participants (response rate of 9.1%) were included in analyses. The sample included 1,284 (23.6%) migrants. Fewer migrants than non-migrants reported receiving a vaccine offer (68.1% vs. 81.1%), and this difference was significant after controlling for prioritization variables (OR 0.65, 95% CI: 0.52-0.82). Subsequent models showed higher odds ratios for reporting having been offered the vaccine for females, and lower odds ratios for those with university education. There were few to no significant differences based on language spoken at home, or among birth countries compared to each other. Duration of residence emerged as an important explanatory variable, as migrants who had lived in Norway for fewer than 15 years were less likely to report offer of a vaccine.ConclusionResults were consistent with studies that show disparities between non-migrants and migrants in actual vaccine uptake. While differences in receiving an offer cannot fully explain disparities in vaccination rates, our analyses suggest that receiving, or recognizing and understanding, an offer does play a role. Issues related to duration of residence, such as inclusion in population and health registries and health and digital literacy, should be addressed by policymakers and health services organizers.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:Benzodiazepines and opioids are prescribed simultaneously (i.e., "coprescribed") in many clinical settings, despite guidelines advising against this practice and mounting evidence that concomitant use of both medications increases overdose risk. This study sought to characterize the contexts in which benzodiazepine-opioid coprescribing occurs and providers' reasons for coprescribing. METHODS:We conducted focus groups with emergency department (ED) providers (resident and attending physicians, advanced practice providers, and pharmacists) from three hospitals using semistructured interviews to elicit perspectives on benzodiazepine-opioid coprescribing. Discussions were audio-recorded and transcribed. We performed qualitative content analysis of the resulting transcripts using a consensual qualitative research approach, aiming to identify priority categories that describe the phenomenon of benzodiazepine-opioid coprescribing. RESULTS:Participants acknowledged coprescribing rarely and reluctantly and often provided specific discharge instructions when coprescribing. The decision to coprescribe is multifactorial, often isolated to specific clinical and situational contexts (e.g., low back pain, failed solitary opioid therapy) and strongly influenced by a provider's beliefs about the efficacy of combination therapy. The decision to coprescribe is further influenced by a self-imposed pressure to escalate care or avoid hospital admission. When considering potential interventions to reduce the incidence of coprescribing, participants opposed computerized alerts but were supportive of a pharmacist-assisted intervention. Many providers found the process of participating in peer discussions on prescribing habits to be beneficial. CONCLUSIONS:In this qualitative study of ED providers, we found that benzodiazepine-opioid coprescribing occurs in specific clinical and situational contexts, such as the treatment of low back pain or failed solitary opioid therapy. The decision to coprescribe is strongly influenced by a provider's beliefs and by self-imposed pressure to escalate care or avoid admission.

Project description:BackgroundUkrainians numbering approximately 1.2 million are the largest migrant group in Poland. Data on vaccination coverage among migrants are not collected in EU, including Poland. Therefore, this qualitative study aimed to identify vaccination practices in this migrant group, to explore facilitators and barriers to vaccination and related access to Polish healthcare services.MethodsIn September 2019, a qualitative study of Ukrainian migrants (UMs) living in Szczecin, Poland, and recruited through a snowball sampling method, was conducted. Using a semi-structured topic guide, four focus groups were held with 22 UMs aged 18-45. Participants were asked about their attitudes towards vaccination in general with comparison between services in Poland and Ukraine. Following transcription and translation, a thematic analysis was conducted.ResultsRespondents were distrustful of Ukrainian vaccination policy, medical personnel and individual vaccines, however, they often returned to Ukraine for dental and gynaecological appoint-ments. While critical with regards to registering with Polish GPs practices, UMs were confident in health professionals, as well as vaccine delivery. Vaccines were perceived as safer and of better quality than in Ukraine. Difficulties in translating vaccination records were rarely reported, verbal communi-cation was not problematic due to language similarities. All UM parents reported vaccinating their children according to the Polish schedule. However, a significant number of adult UMs have not completed mandatory vaccinations, although they may have obtained false immunization certificates; according to UMs those can be obtained by bribing. Participants reported lower acceptance of the influenza vaccine, mainly due to perceptions around its importance; none had been vaccinated against influenza. None of UMs had heard of the HPV vaccine. UMs experienced challenges in accessing credible online vaccination information in Ukrainian, no official local health authority vaccination material existed either, except for information about measles.ConclusionsThis study pinpointed positive UM attitudes and practices regarding child vaccination in the Polish healthcare system and identified issues for improvement, such as adult vaccination. Health communication should be more tailored within UMs information delivery systems to enable migrants to make informed choices about vaccination. Further research is needed to better assess factors affecting vaccine uptake identified in this study.

Dataset Information

What are the challenges in the vaccination of migrants in Norway from healthcare provider perspectives? A qualitative, phenomenological study.

Publications

What are the challenges in the vaccination of migrants in Norway from healthcare provider perspectives? A qualitative, phenomenological study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets