Multi-infection screening for migrant patients in UK primary care: Challenges and opportunities.

Digital tools HIV Health equity Hepatitis B Hepatitis C Infectious disease screening Migrant Parasitic infection Primary care Tuberculosis

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:
2024
Historique:
received: 18 07 2023
accepted: 28 10 2023
medline: 7 12 2023
pubmed: 7 12 2023
entrez: 7 12 2023
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Migrants in Europe face a disproportionate burden of undiagnosed infection, including tuberculosis, blood-borne viruses, and parasitic infections and many belong to an under-immunised group. The European Centre for Disease Control (ECDC) has called for innovative strategies to deliver integrated multi-disease screening to migrants within primary care, yet this is poorly implemented in the UK. We did an in-depth qualitative study to understand current practice, barriers and solutions to infectious disease screening in primary care, and to seek feedback on a collaboratively developed digitalised integrated clinical decision-making tool called Health Catch UP!, which supports multi-infection screening for migrant patients. Two-phase qualitative study of UK primary healthcare professionals, in-depth semi-structured telephone-interviews were conducted. In Phase A, we conducted interviews with clinical staff (general practitioners (GPs), nurses, health-care-assistants (HCAs)); these informed data collection and analysis for phase B (administrative staff). Data were analysed iteratively, using thematic analysis. In phase A, 48 clinicians were recruited (25 GPs, 15 nurses, seven HCAs, one pharmacist) and 16 administrative staff (11 Practice-Managers, five receptionists) in phase B. Respondents were positive about primary care's ability to effectively deliver infectious disease screening. However, we found current infectious disease screening lacks a standardised approach and many practices have no system for screening meaning migrant patients are not always receiving evidence-based care (i.e., NICE/ECDC/UKHSA screening guidelines). Barriers to screening were reported at patient, staff, and system-levels. Respondents reported poor implementation of existing screening initiatives (e.g., regional latent TB screening) citing overly complex pathways that required extensive administrative/clinical time and lacked financial/expert support. Solutions included patient/staff infectious disease champions, targeted training and specialist support, simplified care pathways for screening and management of positive results, and financial incentivisation. Participants responded positively to Health Catch-UP!, stating it would systematically integrate data and support clinical decision-making, increase knowledge, reduce missed screening opportunities, and normalisation of primary care-based infectious disease screening for migrants. Our results suggest that implementation of infectious disease screening in migrant populations is not comprehensively done in UK primary care. Primary health care professionals support the concept of innovative digital tools like Health Catch-UP! and that they could significantly improve disease detection and effective implementation of screening guidance but that they require robust testing and resourcing.

Sections du résumé

Background UNASSIGNED
Migrants in Europe face a disproportionate burden of undiagnosed infection, including tuberculosis, blood-borne viruses, and parasitic infections and many belong to an under-immunised group. The European Centre for Disease Control (ECDC) has called for innovative strategies to deliver integrated multi-disease screening to migrants within primary care, yet this is poorly implemented in the UK. We did an in-depth qualitative study to understand current practice, barriers and solutions to infectious disease screening in primary care, and to seek feedback on a collaboratively developed digitalised integrated clinical decision-making tool called Health Catch UP!, which supports multi-infection screening for migrant patients.
Methods UNASSIGNED
Two-phase qualitative study of UK primary healthcare professionals, in-depth semi-structured telephone-interviews were conducted. In Phase A, we conducted interviews with clinical staff (general practitioners (GPs), nurses, health-care-assistants (HCAs)); these informed data collection and analysis for phase B (administrative staff). Data were analysed iteratively, using thematic analysis.
Results UNASSIGNED
In phase A, 48 clinicians were recruited (25 GPs, 15 nurses, seven HCAs, one pharmacist) and 16 administrative staff (11 Practice-Managers, five receptionists) in phase B. Respondents were positive about primary care's ability to effectively deliver infectious disease screening. However, we found current infectious disease screening lacks a standardised approach and many practices have no system for screening meaning migrant patients are not always receiving evidence-based care (i.e., NICE/ECDC/UKHSA screening guidelines). Barriers to screening were reported at patient, staff, and system-levels. Respondents reported poor implementation of existing screening initiatives (e.g., regional latent TB screening) citing overly complex pathways that required extensive administrative/clinical time and lacked financial/expert support. Solutions included patient/staff infectious disease champions, targeted training and specialist support, simplified care pathways for screening and management of positive results, and financial incentivisation. Participants responded positively to Health Catch-UP!, stating it would systematically integrate data and support clinical decision-making, increase knowledge, reduce missed screening opportunities, and normalisation of primary care-based infectious disease screening for migrants.
Conclusions UNASSIGNED
Our results suggest that implementation of infectious disease screening in migrant populations is not comprehensively done in UK primary care. Primary health care professionals support the concept of innovative digital tools like Health Catch-UP! and that they could significantly improve disease detection and effective implementation of screening guidance but that they require robust testing and resourcing.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38059072
doi: 10.1016/j.jmh.2023.100203
pii: S2666-6235(23)00053-3
pmc: PMC10696453
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

100203

Informations de copyright

© 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Références

BMJ Open. 2022 Nov 16;12(11):e065645
pubmed: 36385020
Front Public Health. 2023 Feb 15;11:1118227
pubmed: 36875381
J Migr Health. 2021;3:100041
pubmed: 33903857
PLoS One. 2015 Oct 30;10(10):e0141122
pubmed: 26516780
Liver Int. 2013 May;33(5):727-38
pubmed: 23448397
BMJ. 1997 Sep 20;315(7110):740-3
pubmed: 9314762
BMJ Open. 2022 Oct 10;12(10):e062894
pubmed: 36216433
J Am Board Fam Med. 2012 Sep-Oct;25(5):676-85
pubmed: 22956703
J Travel Med. 2019 Feb 1;26(2):
pubmed: 30726941
EClinicalMedicine. 2020 Apr 18;21:100315
pubmed: 32322806
Int J Qual Health Care. 2007 Dec;19(6):349-57
pubmed: 17872937
BMC Health Serv Res. 2015 Mar 13;15:97
pubmed: 25890125
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008 Nov 09;8:73
pubmed: 18992167
BMC Infect Dis. 2014 Dec 03;14:657
pubmed: 25466442
J Travel Med. 2022 Nov 4;29(7):
pubmed: 34230959
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2019 Nov 1;74(Suppl 5):v17-v23
pubmed: 31782500
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Oct 23;15(11):
pubmed: 30360472
Euro Surveill. 2018 Mar;23(11):
pubmed: 29560855
PLoS One. 2014 Oct 15;9(10):e108261
pubmed: 25330079
Fam Pract. 2000 Feb;17(1):71-5
pubmed: 10673494
J Travel Med. 2022 Nov 4;29(7):
pubmed: 36193748
Lancet. 2018 Dec 15;392(10164):2553-2566
pubmed: 30528484
Lancet Infect Dis. 2018 Sep;18(9):e259-e271
pubmed: 29778396
BMJ Open. 2019 Mar 7;9(3):e029188
pubmed: 30850420
Travel Med Infect Dis. 2020 Jul - Aug;36:101611
pubmed: 32126293
Br J Gen Pract. 2016 Jun;66(647):e382-91
pubmed: 27025556
Travel Med Infect Dis. 2021 Jan-Feb;39:101715
pubmed: 32389827

Auteurs

Jessica Carter (J)

The Migrant Health Research Group, St George's, University of London, London, United Kingdom.

Felicity Knights (F)

The Migrant Health Research Group, St George's, University of London, London, United Kingdom.

Anna Deal (A)

The Migrant Health Research Group, St George's, University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, United Kingdom.

Alison F Crawshaw (AF)

The Migrant Health Research Group, St George's, University of London, London, United Kingdom.

Sally E Hayward (SE)

The Migrant Health Research Group, St George's, University of London, London, United Kingdom.

Rebecca Hall (R)

Islington GP Federation, United Kingdom.

Philippa Matthews (P)

Islington GP Federation, United Kingdom.

Farah Seedat (F)

The Migrant Health Research Group, St George's, University of London, London, United Kingdom.

Yusuf Ciftci (Y)

Refugee Council, United Kingdom.

Dominik Zenner (D)

Global Public Health Unit, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, United Kingdom.

Fatima Wurie (F)

Department of Health and Social Care, Office for Health Improvement and Disparities, United Kingdom.

Ines Campos-Matos (I)

Department of Health and Social Care, Addictions and Inclusion Directorate, Office for Health Improvement and Disparities, United Kingdom.

Azeem Majeed (A)

Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, United Kingdom.

Ana Requena-Mendez (A)

Barcelona Institute for Global Health (ISGlobal Campus Clinic), Spain.
Department of Medicine Solna, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.

Sally Hargreaves (S)

The Migrant Health Research Group, St George's, University of London, London, United Kingdom.

Classifications MeSH