支持为被迫移徙者提供响应性卫生保健的机会和做法:来自跨国实践的教训和混合方法系统审查。

Amy Robinson, Protus Musotsi, Ziaur Rahman A Khan, Laura Nellums, Bayan Faiq, Kofi Broadhurst, Gisela Renolds, Michael Pritchard, Andrew Smith
{"title":"支持为被迫移徙者提供响应性卫生保健的机会和做法:来自跨国实践的教训和混合方法系统审查。","authors":"Amy Robinson, Protus Musotsi, Ziaur Rahman A Khan, Laura Nellums, Bayan Faiq, Kofi Broadhurst, Gisela Renolds, Michael Pritchard, Andrew Smith","doi":"10.3310/MRWK3419","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>For those displaced across borders, significant adversity before, during and after displacement journeys, including attitudes and structures in countries of transit and arrival, contributes to considerable risk of poor physical and mental health, and poor and exclusionary experiences of health care.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>We aimed to understand the opportunities and practices that can support better healthcare responses for forced migrants.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>We integrated (1) local stakeholder perspectives, from workshops and dialogue; (2) evidence and knowledge from a mixed-methods systematic review; and (3) learning from five case examples from current international practice.</p><p><strong>Review methods and data sources: </strong>We ran database searches (American Psychological Association PsycINFO, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, MEDLINE, National Institute for Health and Care Research Journals Library) in February 2022, searched relevant agency websites and conducted backward and forward citation searches, extracted data, assessed methodological quality and integrated qualitative and quantitative findings.</p><p><strong>Case examples: </strong>We studied three services in the UK, one in Belgium and one in Australia, conducting semistructured interviews with providers, collaborators and service users, and making site visits and observations if possible.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The review identified 108 studies. We identified six domains of impact: (1) benefit from and creation of community, including linkages with formal (health) services; (2) the formation of networks of care that included traditional and non-traditional providers; (3) proactive engagement, including conducting care in familiar spaces; (4) considered communication; (5) informed providers and enhanced attitudes; and (6) a right to knowledge (respecting the need of new arrivals for information, knowledge and confidence in local systems). The case examples drew attention to the benefits of a willingness to innovate and work outside existing structures, 'micro-flexibility' in interactions with patients, and the creation of safe spaces to encourage trust in providers. Other positive behaviours included engaging in intercultural exchange, facilitating the connection of people with their cultural sphere (e.g. nationality, language) and a reflexive attitude to the individual and their broader circumstances. Social and political structures can diminish these efforts.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Review: wide heterogeneity in study characteristics presented challenges in drawing clear associations from the data. Case examples: we engaged only a small numbers of service users and only with service users from some services.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We found that environments that enable good health and enable people to live lives of meaning are vital. We found that these environments require flexibility and reflexivity in practice, intercultural exchange, humility and a commitment to communication. We suggest that a broader range of caring practitioners can, and should, through intentional and interconnected practice, contribute to the health care of forced migrants. Opening up healthcare systems to include other state actors (e.g. teachers and settlement workers) and a range of non-state actors, who should include community leaders and peers and private players, is a key step in this process.</p><p><strong>Future work: </strong>Future work should focus on the health and health service implications of immigration practices, the inclusion of peers in a range of healthcare roles, alliance-building across unlikely collaborators and the embedding of intercultural exchange in practice.</p><p><strong>Study registration: </strong>This study is registered as PROSPERO (CRD42021271464).</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR132961) and is published in full in <i>Health and Social Care Delivery Research</i>; Vol. 13, No. 13. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.</p>","PeriodicalId":519880,"journal":{"name":"Health and social care delivery research","volume":"13 13","pages":"1-182"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Opportunities and practices supporting responsive health care for forced migrants: lessons from transnational practice and a mixed-methods systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Amy Robinson, Protus Musotsi, Ziaur Rahman A Khan, Laura Nellums, Bayan Faiq, Kofi Broadhurst, Gisela Renolds, Michael Pritchard, Andrew Smith\",\"doi\":\"10.3310/MRWK3419\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>For those displaced across borders, significant adversity before, during and after displacement journeys, including attitudes and structures in countries of transit and arrival, contributes to considerable risk of poor physical and mental health, and poor and exclusionary experiences of health care.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>We aimed to understand the opportunities and practices that can support better healthcare responses for forced migrants.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>We integrated (1) local stakeholder perspectives, from workshops and dialogue; (2) evidence and knowledge from a mixed-methods systematic review; and (3) learning from five case examples from current international practice.</p><p><strong>Review methods and data sources: </strong>We ran database searches (American Psychological Association PsycINFO, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, MEDLINE, National Institute for Health and Care Research Journals Library) in February 2022, searched relevant agency websites and conducted backward and forward citation searches, extracted data, assessed methodological quality and integrated qualitative and quantitative findings.</p><p><strong>Case examples: </strong>We studied three services in the UK, one in Belgium and one in Australia, conducting semistructured interviews with providers, collaborators and service users, and making site visits and observations if possible.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The review identified 108 studies. We identified six domains of impact: (1) benefit from and creation of community, including linkages with formal (health) services; (2) the formation of networks of care that included traditional and non-traditional providers; (3) proactive engagement, including conducting care in familiar spaces; (4) considered communication; (5) informed providers and enhanced attitudes; and (6) a right to knowledge (respecting the need of new arrivals for information, knowledge and confidence in local systems). The case examples drew attention to the benefits of a willingness to innovate and work outside existing structures, 'micro-flexibility' in interactions with patients, and the creation of safe spaces to encourage trust in providers. Other positive behaviours included engaging in intercultural exchange, facilitating the connection of people with their cultural sphere (e.g. nationality, language) and a reflexive attitude to the individual and their broader circumstances. Social and political structures can diminish these efforts.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Review: wide heterogeneity in study characteristics presented challenges in drawing clear associations from the data. Case examples: we engaged only a small numbers of service users and only with service users from some services.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We found that environments that enable good health and enable people to live lives of meaning are vital. We found that these environments require flexibility and reflexivity in practice, intercultural exchange, humility and a commitment to communication. We suggest that a broader range of caring practitioners can, and should, through intentional and interconnected practice, contribute to the health care of forced migrants. Opening up healthcare systems to include other state actors (e.g. teachers and settlement workers) and a range of non-state actors, who should include community leaders and peers and private players, is a key step in this process.</p><p><strong>Future work: </strong>Future work should focus on the health and health service implications of immigration practices, the inclusion of peers in a range of healthcare roles, alliance-building across unlikely collaborators and the embedding of intercultural exchange in practice.</p><p><strong>Study registration: </strong>This study is registered as PROSPERO (CRD42021271464).</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR132961) and is published in full in <i>Health and Social Care Delivery Research</i>; Vol. 13, No. 13. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":519880,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health and social care delivery research\",\"volume\":\"13 13\",\"pages\":\"1-182\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health and social care delivery research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3310/MRWK3419\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health and social care delivery research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3310/MRWK3419","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:对于跨越边界的流离失所者来说,在流离失所旅程之前、期间和之后的重大逆境,包括过境国和抵达国的态度和结构,都造成了身心健康状况不佳的相当大的风险,以及医疗保健的不良和排他性经历。目标:我们旨在了解能够支持对被迫移徙者采取更好的医疗对策的机会和做法。设计:我们整合了(1)当地利益相关者的观点,来自研讨会和对话;(2)来自混合方法系统评价的证据和知识;(3)借鉴当前国际实践中的五个案例。审查方法和数据来源:我们于2022年2月进行数据库检索(美国心理学会PsycINFO、EMBASE、Cochrane中央对照试验注册库、护理及相关健康文献累积索引、MEDLINE、美国国家卫生与护理研究所期刊库),检索相关机构网站,进行前后引文检索,提取数据,评估方法学质量,整合定性和定量结果。案例示例:我们研究了英国的三个服务,一个在比利时,一个在澳大利亚,对供应商、合作者和服务用户进行了半结构化访谈,并在可能的情况下进行了实地考察和观察。结果:该综述确定了108项研究。我们确定了六个影响领域:(1)受益于和创建社区,包括与正规(卫生)服务的联系;(2)形成包括传统和非传统提供者在内的护理网络;(3)主动参与,包括在熟悉的空间进行护理;(4)深思熟虑的沟通;(5)知情的提供者和增强的态度;(6)知情权(尊重新移民对当地系统的信息、知识和信心的需求)。这些案例让人们注意到在现有结构之外进行创新和工作的意愿、与患者互动的“微观灵活性”以及创造安全空间以鼓励对提供者的信任所带来的好处。其他积极行为包括参与跨文化交流,促进人们与其文化领域(如国籍、语言)的联系,以及对个人及其更广泛环境的反思态度。社会和政治结构会削弱这些努力。局限性:回顾:研究特征的广泛异质性给从数据中得出明确的关联带来了挑战。案例示例:我们只与少数服务用户合作,并且只与某些服务的服务用户合作。结论:我们发现,能让人们保持健康、过上有意义的生活的环境至关重要。我们发现,这些环境需要实践中的灵活性和反身性、跨文化交流、谦逊和对沟通的承诺。我们建议,范围更广的护理从业人员能够而且应该通过有意和相互关联的做法,为被迫移徙者的保健作出贡献。开放卫生保健系统,使其包括其他国家行为者(例如教师和安置工作者)和一系列非国家行为者,这些行为者应包括社区领导人和同行以及私人行为者,这是这一进程中的关键一步。未来的工作:未来的工作应侧重于移民做法对健康和保健服务的影响,将同行纳入一系列保健角色,在不太可能的合作者之间建立联盟,以及在实践中融入跨文化交流。研究注册:本研究注册号为PROSPERO (CRD42021271464)。资助:该奖项由国家卫生和保健研究所(NIHR)卫生和社会保健提供研究项目(NIHR奖励编号:NIHR132961)资助,全文发表在《卫生和社会保健提供研究》上;第13卷,第13号有关进一步的奖励信息,请参阅美国国立卫生研究院资助和奖励网站。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Opportunities and practices supporting responsive health care for forced migrants: lessons from transnational practice and a mixed-methods systematic review.

Background: For those displaced across borders, significant adversity before, during and after displacement journeys, including attitudes and structures in countries of transit and arrival, contributes to considerable risk of poor physical and mental health, and poor and exclusionary experiences of health care.

Objectives: We aimed to understand the opportunities and practices that can support better healthcare responses for forced migrants.

Design: We integrated (1) local stakeholder perspectives, from workshops and dialogue; (2) evidence and knowledge from a mixed-methods systematic review; and (3) learning from five case examples from current international practice.

Review methods and data sources: We ran database searches (American Psychological Association PsycINFO, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, MEDLINE, National Institute for Health and Care Research Journals Library) in February 2022, searched relevant agency websites and conducted backward and forward citation searches, extracted data, assessed methodological quality and integrated qualitative and quantitative findings.

Case examples: We studied three services in the UK, one in Belgium and one in Australia, conducting semistructured interviews with providers, collaborators and service users, and making site visits and observations if possible.

Results: The review identified 108 studies. We identified six domains of impact: (1) benefit from and creation of community, including linkages with formal (health) services; (2) the formation of networks of care that included traditional and non-traditional providers; (3) proactive engagement, including conducting care in familiar spaces; (4) considered communication; (5) informed providers and enhanced attitudes; and (6) a right to knowledge (respecting the need of new arrivals for information, knowledge and confidence in local systems). The case examples drew attention to the benefits of a willingness to innovate and work outside existing structures, 'micro-flexibility' in interactions with patients, and the creation of safe spaces to encourage trust in providers. Other positive behaviours included engaging in intercultural exchange, facilitating the connection of people with their cultural sphere (e.g. nationality, language) and a reflexive attitude to the individual and their broader circumstances. Social and political structures can diminish these efforts.

Limitations: Review: wide heterogeneity in study characteristics presented challenges in drawing clear associations from the data. Case examples: we engaged only a small numbers of service users and only with service users from some services.

Conclusions: We found that environments that enable good health and enable people to live lives of meaning are vital. We found that these environments require flexibility and reflexivity in practice, intercultural exchange, humility and a commitment to communication. We suggest that a broader range of caring practitioners can, and should, through intentional and interconnected practice, contribute to the health care of forced migrants. Opening up healthcare systems to include other state actors (e.g. teachers and settlement workers) and a range of non-state actors, who should include community leaders and peers and private players, is a key step in this process.

Future work: Future work should focus on the health and health service implications of immigration practices, the inclusion of peers in a range of healthcare roles, alliance-building across unlikely collaborators and the embedding of intercultural exchange in practice.

Study registration: This study is registered as PROSPERO (CRD42021271464).

Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR132961) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 13, No. 13. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信