Social prescribing for migrants in the United Kingdom: A systematic review and call for evidence.
Asylum seeker
Health
Link worker
Migrant
Navigation
Refugee
Social prescribing
Wellbeing
Journal
Journal of migration and health
ISSN: 2666-6235
Titre abrégé: J Migr Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101774615
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
09
06
2021
accepted:
06
10
2021
entrez:
8
11
2021
pubmed:
9
11
2021
medline:
9
11
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The health needs of international migrants living in the United Kingdom (UK) extend beyond mainstream healthcare to services that address the wider determinants of health and wellbeing. Social prescribing, which links individuals to these wider services, is a key component of the UK National Health Service (NHS) strategy, yet little is known about social prescribing approaches and outcomes for international migrants. This review describes the evidence base on social prescribing for migrants in the UK. A systematic review was undertaken, which identified studies through a systematic search of 4 databases and 8 grey literature sources (January 2000 to June 2020) and a call for evidence on the UK government website (July to October 2020). Published and unpublished studies of evaluated social prescribing programmes in the UK were included where at least 1 participant was identified as a migrant. Screening, data extraction and quality appraisal were performed by one reviewer, with a second reviewer checking 20% of studies. A narrative synthesis was conducted. Of the 4544 records identified, 32 were included in this review. The overall body of evidence was low in quality. Social prescribing approaches for migrants in the UK varied widely between programmes. Link workers who delivered services to migrants often took on additional support roles and/or actively delivered parts of the prescribed activities themselves, which is outside of the scope of the typical link worker role. Evidence for improvements to health and wellbeing and changes in healthcare utilisation were largely anecdotal and lacked measures of effect. Improved self-esteem, confidence, empowerment and social connectivity were frequently described. Facilitators of successful implementation included provider responsiveness to migrants' preferences in relation to language, culture, gender and service delivery format. Barriers included limited funding and provider capability. Social prescribing programmes should be tailored to the individual needs of migrants. Link workers also require appropriate training on how to support migrants to address the wider determinants of health. Robust evaluation built into future social prescribing programmes for migrants should include better data collection on participant demographics and measurement of outcomes using validated and culturally and linguistically appropriate tools. Future research is needed to explore reasons for link workers taking on additional responsibilities when providing services to migrants, and whether migrants' needs are better addressed through a single-function link worker role or transdisciplinary support roles.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The health needs of international migrants living in the United Kingdom (UK) extend beyond mainstream healthcare to services that address the wider determinants of health and wellbeing. Social prescribing, which links individuals to these wider services, is a key component of the UK National Health Service (NHS) strategy, yet little is known about social prescribing approaches and outcomes for international migrants. This review describes the evidence base on social prescribing for migrants in the UK.
METHODS
METHODS
A systematic review was undertaken, which identified studies through a systematic search of 4 databases and 8 grey literature sources (January 2000 to June 2020) and a call for evidence on the UK government website (July to October 2020). Published and unpublished studies of evaluated social prescribing programmes in the UK were included where at least 1 participant was identified as a migrant. Screening, data extraction and quality appraisal were performed by one reviewer, with a second reviewer checking 20% of studies. A narrative synthesis was conducted.
FINDINGS
RESULTS
Of the 4544 records identified, 32 were included in this review. The overall body of evidence was low in quality. Social prescribing approaches for migrants in the UK varied widely between programmes. Link workers who delivered services to migrants often took on additional support roles and/or actively delivered parts of the prescribed activities themselves, which is outside of the scope of the typical link worker role. Evidence for improvements to health and wellbeing and changes in healthcare utilisation were largely anecdotal and lacked measures of effect. Improved self-esteem, confidence, empowerment and social connectivity were frequently described. Facilitators of successful implementation included provider responsiveness to migrants' preferences in relation to language, culture, gender and service delivery format. Barriers included limited funding and provider capability.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Social prescribing programmes should be tailored to the individual needs of migrants. Link workers also require appropriate training on how to support migrants to address the wider determinants of health. Robust evaluation built into future social prescribing programmes for migrants should include better data collection on participant demographics and measurement of outcomes using validated and culturally and linguistically appropriate tools. Future research is needed to explore reasons for link workers taking on additional responsibilities when providing services to migrants, and whether migrants' needs are better addressed through a single-function link worker role or transdisciplinary support roles.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34746902
doi: 10.1016/j.jmh.2021.100067
pii: S2666-6235(21)00034-9
pmc: PMC8556515
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
100067Subventions
Organisme : Wellcome Trust
ID : 206602/Z/17/Z
Pays : United Kingdom
Informations de copyright
Crown Copyright © 2021 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Dominik Zenner is an Associate Editor of the Journal of Migration and Health. No other authors have competing interests to declare.
Références
Br J Gen Pract. 2019 Jan;69(678):6-7
pubmed: 30591594
BMJ Open. 2016 Jun 20;6(6):e011499
pubmed: 27324716
BMJ Open. 2017 Apr 7;7(4):e013384
pubmed: 28389486
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2013 Feb 27;11:27
pubmed: 23445544
Health Soc Care Community. 2002 Mar;10(2):112-22
pubmed: 12121270
BMC Health Serv Res. 2007 May 30;7:75
pubmed: 17537258
J Migr Health. 2021 Jul 07;4:100061
pubmed: 34405201
Midwifery. 2017 Feb;45:36-43
pubmed: 27987406
Wellcome Open Res. 2019 Jul 22;4:109
pubmed: 31544156
Br J Gen Pract. 2019 Aug;69(685):e537-e545
pubmed: 30745354
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2017 Jan 13;17(1):28
pubmed: 28086827
BMC Health Serv Res. 2012 Dec 17;12:461
pubmed: 23245431
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2015 Oct 12;15:257
pubmed: 26459281
Value Health. 2005 Mar-Apr;8(2):94-104
pubmed: 15804318
Lancet. 2018 Dec 15;392(10164):2606-2654
pubmed: 30528486
Complement Ther Med. 2007 Mar;15(1):38-45
pubmed: 17352970