“What’s happening in Syria even affects the rocks”: a qualitative study of the Syrian refugee experience accessing noncommunicable disease services in Jordan

Background Humanitarian actors and host-countries in the Middle East and North Africa region are challenged with meeting the health needs of Syrian refugees and adjusting the response to contemporary humanitarian conditions – urban-based refugees, stressed host-country health systems and high NCD prevalence. Although several studies have explored NCD prevalence, utilization of services and barriers to access, these analyses took place prior to dramatic shifts in Jordanian health policy and did not account for nuances in health seeking and utilization behaviors or operational barriers. Accordingly, we aimed to understand the depth and nuances of Syrian refugees’ experiences accessing NCD services in urban and semi-urban settings in Jordan. Methods A qualitative study was conducted to explore the healthcare experiences of Syrian refugees in Jordan. The study team conducted 68 in-depth interviews with Syrian refugees in urban and semi-urban locations in central and northern Jordan. Results The findings indicated four themes key to understanding the healthcare experience: (1) emotional distress is a central concern and is frequently highlighted as the trigger for a non-communicable disease or its exacerbation; (2) service provision across all sectors – government, NGO, private – is complex, inadequate, expensive and fragmented, making engagement with the health sector physically and financially burdensome; (3) given financial constraints, participants make harmful decisions that further damage their health in order to reduce financial burdens, and (4) host-community members actively exhibit solidarity with their refugee neighbors and specifically do so during emergency health episodes. The findings from this study can be used to inform program design for forcibly displaced persons with NCDs and identify points of entry for effective interventions. Conclusions Opportunities exist for humanitarian and host-country actors to provide more comprehensive NCD services and to improve the relevance and the quality of care provided to Syrian refugees in Jordan. Global and national funding will need to align with front-line realities and foster better coordination of services between host-country health systems, private actors and non-governmental organizations

Nationwide evaluation of the advanced clinical practitioner role in England: a cross-sectional survey

Copyright © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Background and study objective In response to growing pressures on healthcare systems, the advanced clinical practice (ACP) role has been implemented widely in the UK and internationally. In England, ACP is a level of practice applicable across various healthcare professions, who exercise a level of autonomy across four domains, referred to as the four pillars of practice (education, leadership, research and clinical practice). A national framework for ACP was established in 2017 to ensure consistency across the ACP role, however current ACP governance, education and support is yet to be evaluated. This study aimed to analyse data from a national survey of the ACP role to inform the development and improvement of policies relating to ACP in the National Health Service (NHS) in England. Design A cross-sectional survey with free-text comments. Setting The survey was distributed across primary and secondary levels of care to three distinct groups in England, including individual ACPs, NHS provider organisations and Trusts and primary care settings. Participants A total of 4365 surveys were returned, from ACP staff (n=4013), NHS provider organisations and Trusts (n=166) and primary care organisations (n=186). Results Considerable variation was found in role titles, scope of practice, job descriptions and educational backgrounds of ACPs. Differing approaches to governance were noted, which led to inconsistent ACP frameworks in some organisations. A further challenge highlighted included committing time to work across the four pillars of advanced practice, particularly the research pillar. ACPs called for improvements in supervision and continuing professional development alongside further support in navigating career pathways. Conclusions A standardised approach may support ACP workforce development in England and enable ACPs to work across the four pillars of practice. Due to the wide uptake of ACP roles internationally, this study has relevance across professions for global healthcare workforce transformationHealth Education England (grant number ASA273 HKAUR-HEER)

Ethnic differences in SARS-CoV-2 vaccine hesitancy in United Kingdom healthcare workers: Results from the UK-REACH prospective nationwide cohort study

Background: In most countries, healthcare workers (HCWs) represent a priority group for vaccination against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) due to their elevated risk of COVID-19 and potential contribution to nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Concerns have been raised that HCWs from ethnic minority groups are more likely to be vaccine hesitant (defined by the World Health Organisation as refusing or delaying a vaccination) than those of White ethnicity, but there are limited data on SARS-CoV-2 vaccine hesitancy and its predictors in UK HCWs. Methods: Nationwide prospective cohort study and qualitative study in a multi-ethnic cohort of clinical and non-clinical UK HCWs. We analysed ethnic differences in SARS-CoV-2 vaccine hesitancy adjusting for demographics, vaccine trust, and perceived risk of COVID-19. We explored reasons for hesitancy in qualitative data using a framework analysis. Findings: 11,584 HCWs were included in the cohort analysis. 23% (2704) reported vaccine hesitancy. Compared to White British HCWs (21.3% hesitant), HCWs from Black Caribbean (54.2%), Mixed White and Black Caribbean (38.1%), Black African (34.4%), Chinese (33.1%), Pakistani (30.4%), and White Other (28.7%) ethnic groups were significantly more likely to be hesitant. In adjusted analysis, Black Caribbean (aOR 3.37, 95% CI 2.11 - 5.37), Black African (aOR 2.05, 95% CI 1.49 - 2.82), White Other ethnic groups (aOR 1.48, 95% CI 1.19 - 1.84) were significantly more likely to be hesitant. Other independent predictors of hesitancy were younger age, female sex, higher score on a COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs scale, lower trust in employer, lack of influenza vaccine uptake in the previous season, previous COVID-19, and pregnancy. Qualitative data from 99 participants identified the following contributors to hesitancy: lack of trust in government and employers, safety concerns due to the speed of vaccine development, lack of ethnic diversity in vaccine studies, and confusing and conflicting information. Participants felt uptake in ethnic minority communities might be improved through inclusive communication, involving HCWs in the vaccine rollout, and promoting vaccination through trusted networks. Interpretation: Despite increased risk of COVID-19, HCWs from some ethnic minority groups are more likely to be vaccine hesitant than their White British colleagues. Strategies to build trust and dispel myths surrounding the COVID-19 vaccine in these communities are urgently required. Emphasis should be placed on the safety and benefit of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in pregnancy and in those with previous COVID-19. Public health communications should be inclusive, non-stigmatising and utilise trusted networks

Antimicrobial resistance among migrants in Europe: a systematic review and meta-analysis - update from 2017 to 2023

Background Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a critical global health concern. A previous systematic review showed that migrants in Europe are at increased risk of AMR. Since the COVID-19 pandemic there have been rapid changes in patterns of antibiotic use, AMR, and migration. We aimed to present an updated evidence synthesis on the current distribution of AMR among migrants in Europe. Methods We carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis in accordance with PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO ID: CRD42022343263). We searched databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed and Scopus) from 18 January 2017 until 18 January 2023 to identify primary data from observational studies reporting any laboratory-confirmed AMR among migrants in the European Economic Area (EEA) and European Union-15 (EU-15) countries using over 7 key search terms for migrants and over 70 terms for AMR and countries in Europe. Outcomes were infection with, or colonisation of AMR bacteria. Methodological quality was assessed using Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Observational Studies. We meta-analysed the pooled-prevalence of infection and/or colonisation of AMR organisms. Findings Among 630 articles, 21 observational studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review. The pooled prevalence for any detected AMR was 28.0% (95% CI 18.0%–41.0%, I2 = 100%) compared to a 25.4% seen in the previous review; gram-negative bacteria 31.0% (95% CI 20.0%–44.0%, I2 = 100%), and methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus 10.0% (95% CI 5.0%–16.0%, I2 = 99%). Drug-resistant bacteria were more prevalent in community settings in large migrant populations (pooled prevalence: 41.0%, 95% CI 24.0%–60.0%, I2 = 99%) than in hospitals (21.0%, 95% CI 12.0%–32.0%, I2 = 99%). AMR estimates in ‘other’ migrants were 32.0%, (95% CI 12.0%–57.0%, I2 = 100%) and 28.0% (95% CI 18.0%–38.0%, I2 = 100%) in forced migrants. No firm evidence of AMR acquisition with arrival time or length of stay in the host country was found. Interpretation Studies investigating AMR in migrants are highly heterogenous. However, since the COVID-19 pandemic, migrants may be at higher risk of acquiring resistant bacteria, particularly gram-negative bacteria, within community settings such as refugee camps and detention centres in Europe. Our study highlights the importance of infrastructure and hygiene measures within these settings, to mitigate transmission of resistant pathogens. Policy-makers should screen for AMR in migrants prior to departure from countries of origin, where feasible, and upon arrival to a new country to ensure optimal health screening, infection control and effective treatment

Caring for Those Who Take Care of Others: Developing Systemic and Sustainable Mental Health Support for the Diverse Healthcare Workforce in the United Kingdom

Pressures such as high workload, stretched resources, and financial stress are resulting in healthcare workers experiencing high rates of mental health conditions, high suicide rates, high rates of staff absences from work, and high vacancy rates for certain healthcare professions. All of these factors point to the fact that a systematic and sustainable approach to mental health support at different levels and in different ways is more important than ever. In response, we present a holistic analysis of the mental health and wellbeing needs of healthcare workers across the United Kingdom healthcare ecosystem. We recommend that healthcare organisations should consider the specific circumstances of these staff and develop strategies to counter the negative impact of these factors and help safeguard the mental health of their staff

Ethnic differences in SARS-CoV-2 vaccine hesitancy in United Kingdom healthcare workers: Results from the UK-REACH prospective nationwide cohort study

Background In most countries, healthcare workers (HCWs) represent a priority group for vaccination against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) due to their elevated risk of COVID-19 and potential contribution to nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Concerns have been raised that HCWs from ethnic minority groups are more likely to be vaccine hesitant (defined by the World Health Organisation as refusing or delaying a vaccination) than those of White ethnicity, but there are limited data on SARS-CoV-2 vaccine hesitancy and its predictors in UK HCWs. Methods Nationwide prospective cohort study and qualitative study in a multi-ethnic cohort of clinical and non-clinical UK HCWs. We analysed ethnic differences in SARS-CoV-2 vaccine hesitancy adjusting for demographics, vaccine trust, and perceived risk of COVID-19. We explored reasons for hesitancy in qualitative data using a framework analysis. Findings11,584 HCWs were included in the cohort analysis. 23% (2704) reported vaccine hesitancy. Compared to White British HCWs (21.3% hesitant), HCWs from Black Caribbean (54.2%), Mixed White and Black Caribbean (38.1%), Black African (34.4%), Chinese (33.1%), Pakistani (30.4%), and White Other (28.7%) ethnic groups were significantly more likely to be hesitant. In adjusted analysis, Black Caribbean (aOR 3.37, 95% CI 2.11 - 5.37), Black African (aOR 2.05, 95% CI 1.49 - 2.82), White Other ethnic groups (aOR 1.48, 95% CI 1.19 - 1.84) were significantly more likely to be hesitant. Other independent predictors of hesitancy were younger age, female sex, higher score on a COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs scale, lower trust in employer, lack of influenza vaccine uptake in the previous season, previous COVID-19, and pregnancy. Qualitative data from 99 participants identified the following contributors to hesitancy: lack of trust in government and employers, safety concerns due to the speed of vaccine development, lack of ethnic diversity in vaccine studies, and confusing and conflicting information. Participants felt uptake in ethnic minority communities might be improved through inclusive communication, involving HCWs in the vaccine rollout, and promoting vaccination through trusted networks. Interpretation Despite increased risk of COVID-19, HCWs from some ethnic minority groups are more likely to be vaccine hesitant than their White British colleagues. Strategies to build trust and dispel myths surrounding the COVID-19 vaccine in these communities are urgently required. Emphasis should be placed on the safety and benefit of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in pregnancy and in those with previous COVID-19. Public health communications should be inclusive, non-stigmatising and utilise trusted networks. Funding UKRI-MRC and NIHR

A Mixed-methods Study of post-COVID-19 Outcomes in Healthcare Workers from Diverse Ethnicities (REACH-OUT)

BackgroundThis thesis explored the prevalence, symptomatology, and risk factors associated with long COVID among healthcare workers (HCWs), with a specific focus on the role of socio-demographic and occupational factors. It also aimed to assess the broader implications of long COVID on the healthcare workforce—considering the roles of support networks and management—to better understand its impact on both their work and home lives.MethodsI employed a mixed-methods approach comprising of four studies: (1) a systematic review and meta-analysis of the global prevalence and symptom profiles of long COVID among HCWs; (2) a cross-sectional analysis using UK-REACH study baseline questionnaire data to estimate prevalence and risk factors among UK HCWs early in the pandemic; (3) a cross-sectional analysis using UK-REACH study third questionnaire and REACH-OUT first questionnaire data to estimate long COVID prevalence, symptom groups, and ethnic differences at a later stage in the pandemic; and (4) a qualitative study exploring the experiences of HCWs, their support networks, and healthcare managers through semi-structured in-depth interviews.ResultsThe systematic review showed a high global burden of long COVID among HCWs, with fatigue as the most common symptom. Cross-sectional analyses identified significant associations between long COVID and demographic and occupational factors, including female sex, age, pre-existing comorbidities, and being in nursing or allied health professional roles, while qualitative findings highlighted challenges such as stigma, lack of understanding about long COVID, and home and workplace difficulties.ConclusionsThere is a high burden of long COVID among HCWs which presents substantial challenges to HCWs and healthcare systems, necessitating comprehensive support frameworks tailored to HCWs’ specific needs. Recommendations include workplace flexibility, equitable access to multidisciplinary rehabilitation, and culturally competent care. To ensure the sustainability of healthcare services, policies need to be standardised to reduce stigma and mitigate the long-term impact of long COVID on HCWs.</p