[减少 COVID-19 对移民的影响:干预措施效果的系统性审查]。

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q4 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Achille Cernigliaro, Paolo Giorgi Rossi, Anteo Di Napoli, Caterina Milli, Alessio Petrelli, Salvatore Scondotto, Stefania D'Amato, Stefania Mondello
{"title":"[减少 COVID-19 对移民的影响:干预措施效果的系统性审查]。","authors":"Achille Cernigliaro, Paolo Giorgi Rossi, Anteo Di Napoli, Caterina Milli, Alessio Petrelli, Salvatore Scondotto, Stefania D'Amato, Stefania Mondello","doi":"10.19191/EP24.4-5.S1.116","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in the population has amplified the effects of health inequalities, particularly in the most vulnerable groups such as immigrants and refugees. An assessment of the intervention to contain the COVID-19 in these population groups was essential to define new strategies for more equitable, inclusive, and effective health policies to on health.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>to provide a systematic synopsis of the impact of interventions to contain the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in immigrants.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>data sources included major bibliographic databases. Using a study protocol, already shared with the international scientific community, two independent researchers reviewed the citations, selected and evaluated the interventions studies. Due to the heterogeneity of the interventions, a narrative synthesis was carried out.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>three eligible studies were identified. The first study modelled the incidence of the disease in a refugee camp in Greece, based on an intervention of sectorialization of people that accessed to services, the use of masks, the early identification and isolation of cases and their family members, and the limitation of movements within the camp. The second evaluated the impact of preventive pharmacological interventions such as the use of hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin, povidone-iodine, zinc, and vitamin C, in different dosages and combinations, to a group of immigrant workers in a city dormitory in Singapore. The third study evaluated an intervention to increase vaccination coverage within a Latino immigrant community in the United States, moving the location of vaccine supply throughout the most frequented contexts by the immigrant community to access the city services. The results of the first and second studies suggest impacts for some of the proposed interventions even if they have been partially overcome due to the use of mass vaccination. The third showed a reduction in vaccine hesitancy and an increase in vaccination uptake and a snowball effect.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>the systematic review identified few heterogeneous studies, preventing any generalization of the results. Probably, the low scientific production does not reflect the successful experiences implemented. In the case of a possible resumption of the epidemic or new emergencies, it will be necessary to rely on indirect evidence and the scientific community should consider more the responsibility to evaluate and make available the experiences gained in the field. A constant monitoring activity of the evidence that will be necessary to updating the results for suggest consolidated prevention measures to for controlling the incidence of COVID-19 in immigrants during a possible resumption of the epidemic and for application in other similarly emergency contexts.</p>","PeriodicalId":50511,"journal":{"name":"Epidemiologia & Prevenzione","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[Reducing the impact of COVID-19 in immigrants: a systematic review of the efficacy of interventions].\",\"authors\":\"Achille Cernigliaro, Paolo Giorgi Rossi, Anteo Di Napoli, Caterina Milli, Alessio Petrelli, Salvatore Scondotto, Stefania D'Amato, Stefania Mondello\",\"doi\":\"10.19191/EP24.4-5.S1.116\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in the population has amplified the effects of health inequalities, particularly in the most vulnerable groups such as immigrants and refugees. An assessment of the intervention to contain the COVID-19 in these population groups was essential to define new strategies for more equitable, inclusive, and effective health policies to on health.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>to provide a systematic synopsis of the impact of interventions to contain the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in immigrants.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>data sources included major bibliographic databases. Using a study protocol, already shared with the international scientific community, two independent researchers reviewed the citations, selected and evaluated the interventions studies. Due to the heterogeneity of the interventions, a narrative synthesis was carried out.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>three eligible studies were identified. The first study modelled the incidence of the disease in a refugee camp in Greece, based on an intervention of sectorialization of people that accessed to services, the use of masks, the early identification and isolation of cases and their family members, and the limitation of movements within the camp. The second evaluated the impact of preventive pharmacological interventions such as the use of hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin, povidone-iodine, zinc, and vitamin C, in different dosages and combinations, to a group of immigrant workers in a city dormitory in Singapore. The third study evaluated an intervention to increase vaccination coverage within a Latino immigrant community in the United States, moving the location of vaccine supply throughout the most frequented contexts by the immigrant community to access the city services. The results of the first and second studies suggest impacts for some of the proposed interventions even if they have been partially overcome due to the use of mass vaccination. The third showed a reduction in vaccine hesitancy and an increase in vaccination uptake and a snowball effect.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>the systematic review identified few heterogeneous studies, preventing any generalization of the results. Probably, the low scientific production does not reflect the successful experiences implemented. In the case of a possible resumption of the epidemic or new emergencies, it will be necessary to rely on indirect evidence and the scientific community should consider more the responsibility to evaluate and make available the experiences gained in the field. A constant monitoring activity of the evidence that will be necessary to updating the results for suggest consolidated prevention measures to for controlling the incidence of COVID-19 in immigrants during a possible resumption of the epidemic and for application in other similarly emergency contexts.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50511,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Epidemiologia & Prevenzione\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Epidemiologia & Prevenzione\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.19191/EP24.4-5.S1.116\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epidemiologia & Prevenzione","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.19191/EP24.4-5.S1.116","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:SARS-CoV-2 在人群中的传播扩大了健康不平等的影响,尤其是在移民和难民等最弱势群体中。评估在这些人群中采取的遏制 COVID-19 的干预措施对于制定更加公平、包容和有效的健康政策新策略至关重要。方法:数据来源包括主要的文献数据库。两名独立的研究人员使用已与国际科学界共享的研究方案,对引文进行了审查,筛选并评估了干预研究。由于干预措施的异质性,研究人员进行了叙述性综合。第一项研究模拟了希腊难民营的发病率,其干预措施包括对获得服务的人群进行分区、使用口罩、及早识别和隔离病例及其家庭成员,以及限制难民营内的活动。第二项研究评估了预防性药物干预措施的影响,如使用不同剂量和组合的羟氯喹、伊维菌素、聚维酮碘、锌和维生素 C,对新加坡城市宿舍中的一群移民工人进行干预。第三项研究评估了一项旨在提高美国拉丁裔移民社区疫苗接种覆盖率的干预措施,将疫苗供应地点转移到移民社区最常去的城市服务场所。第一项和第二项研究的结果表明,即使由于使用了大规模疫苗接种而部分克服了某些拟议干预措施的影响,但这些干预措施还是产生了影响。第三项研究表明,疫苗接种犹豫不决的情况有所减少,疫苗接种率有所提高,并产生了滚雪球效应。科学成果较少可能并不反映已实施的成功经验。在疫情可能再次爆发或出现新的紧急情况时,有必要依靠间接证据,科学界应更多地考虑评估和提供实地经验的责任。有必要对证据进行持续监测,以便更新结果,提出综合预防措施,在疫情可能再次爆发时控制 COVID-19 在移民中的传播,并在其他类似紧急情况下应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
[Reducing the impact of COVID-19 in immigrants: a systematic review of the efficacy of interventions].

Background: the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in the population has amplified the effects of health inequalities, particularly in the most vulnerable groups such as immigrants and refugees. An assessment of the intervention to contain the COVID-19 in these population groups was essential to define new strategies for more equitable, inclusive, and effective health policies to on health.

Objectives: to provide a systematic synopsis of the impact of interventions to contain the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in immigrants.

Methods: data sources included major bibliographic databases. Using a study protocol, already shared with the international scientific community, two independent researchers reviewed the citations, selected and evaluated the interventions studies. Due to the heterogeneity of the interventions, a narrative synthesis was carried out.

Results: three eligible studies were identified. The first study modelled the incidence of the disease in a refugee camp in Greece, based on an intervention of sectorialization of people that accessed to services, the use of masks, the early identification and isolation of cases and their family members, and the limitation of movements within the camp. The second evaluated the impact of preventive pharmacological interventions such as the use of hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin, povidone-iodine, zinc, and vitamin C, in different dosages and combinations, to a group of immigrant workers in a city dormitory in Singapore. The third study evaluated an intervention to increase vaccination coverage within a Latino immigrant community in the United States, moving the location of vaccine supply throughout the most frequented contexts by the immigrant community to access the city services. The results of the first and second studies suggest impacts for some of the proposed interventions even if they have been partially overcome due to the use of mass vaccination. The third showed a reduction in vaccine hesitancy and an increase in vaccination uptake and a snowball effect.

Conclusions: the systematic review identified few heterogeneous studies, preventing any generalization of the results. Probably, the low scientific production does not reflect the successful experiences implemented. In the case of a possible resumption of the epidemic or new emergencies, it will be necessary to rely on indirect evidence and the scientific community should consider more the responsibility to evaluate and make available the experiences gained in the field. A constant monitoring activity of the evidence that will be necessary to updating the results for suggest consolidated prevention measures to for controlling the incidence of COVID-19 in immigrants during a possible resumption of the epidemic and for application in other similarly emergency contexts.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Epidemiologia & Prevenzione
Epidemiologia & Prevenzione 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
14.30%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Epidemiologia & Prevenzione, oggi organo della Associazione italiana di epidemiologia, raccoglie buona parte delle migliori e originali esperienze italiane di ricerca epidemiologica e di studio degli interventi per la prevenzione e la sanità pubblica. La rivista – indicizzata su Medline e dotata di Impact Factor – è un canale importante anche per la segnalazione al pubblico internazionale di contributi che altrimenti circolerebbero soltanto in Italia. E&P in questi decenni ha svolto una funzione di riferimento per la sanità pubblica ma anche per i cittadini e le loro diverse forme di aggregazione. Il principio che l’ha ispirata era, e rimane, che l’epidemiologia ha senso se è funzionale alla prevenzione e alla sanità pubblica e che la prevenzione ha ben poche possibilità di realizzarsi se non si fonda su valide basi scientifiche e se non c’è la partecipazione di tutti i soggetti interessati. Modalità di comunicazione aggiornate, metodologia statistica ed epidemiologica rigorosa, validità degli studi e solidità delle interpretazioni dei risultati sono la solida matrice su cui E&P è costruita. A questa si accompagna una forte responsabilità etica verso la salute pubblica, che oggi ha ampliato in forma irreversibile il suo orizzonte, e include in forma sempre più consapevole non solo gli esseri umani, ma l’intero pianeta e le modificazioni che l’uomo apporta all’universo in cui vive. L’ambizione è che l’offerta di nuovi strumenti di comunicazione, informazione e formazione, soprattutto attraverso l''uso di internet, renda la rivista non solo un tradizionale veicolo di contenuti e analisi scientifiche, ma anche un potente strumento a disposizione di una comunità di interessi e di valori che ha a cuore la salute pubblica.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信