Suchergebnisse

There is a knowledge translation gap between policies promoting equitable access to healthcare and person-centred care, and the use of untrained interpreters in cross-cultural consultations leading to disparities in health outcomes. An 11 member inter-sectoral working group met at four workshops to discuss and agree on levers and barriers to the provision of trained interpreters in healthcare settings in Ireland. The process was informed by Participatory Learning and Action (PLA) research to support inter-stakeholder dialogue and learning. Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) was used as a conceptual framework to analyse levers and barriers. The NPT analysis explored sense-making, engagement and enactment and found challenges with sense-making and engagement in senior level service planners, managers and governmental offices. This had negative impacts on other key actors, including healthcare providers, medical students and interpreters. This also meant that the enactment of interpreted consultations in practice settings was replete with barriers, most notably a lack of resources, training and supportive organisational structures. The emergent action plan focused on improving sense-making and engagement through inter-sectoral awareness raising, designed to stimulate a series of complementary levers for implementation. Combining PLA and NPT provided new insights into macro level influences on implementation work at the level of a national healthcare system. The approaches used in this study are applicable in other fields.

peer-reviewed ; There is a knowledge translation gap between policies promoting equitable access to healthcare and person-centred care, and the use of untrained interpreters in cross-cultural consultations leading to disparities in health outcomes. An 11 member inter-sectoral working group met at four workshops to discuss and agree on levers and barriers to the provision of trained interpreters in healthcare settings in Ireland. The process was informed by Participatory Learning and Action (PLA) research to support inter-stakeholder dialogue and learning. Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) was used as a conceptual framework to analyse levers and barriers. The NPT analysis explored sense-making, engagement and enactment and found challenges with sense-making and engagement in senior level service planners, managers and governmental offices. This had negative impacts on other key actors, including healthcare providers, medical students and interpreters. This also meant that the enactment of interpreted consultations in practice settings was replete with barriers, most notably a lack of resources, training and supportive organisational structures. The emergent action plan focused on improving sense-making and engagement through inter-sectoral awareness raising, designed to stimulate a series of complementary levers for implementation. Combining PLA and NPT provided new insights into macro level influences on implementation work at the level of a national healthcare system. The approaches used in this study are applicable in other fields.

CONTEXT: Migration is one of the most politically pressing issues of the 21st century but migrant health remains an under‐researched area. The International Collaboration for Participatory Health Research (ICPHR) working group on migration developed this position statement to address opportunities and challenges in relation to migrant health. It aims to contribute to a shift from a deficit model that sees migrants as passively affected by policies to their reconceptualization as citizens who are engaged in the co‐creation of solutions. METHODS: This paper examines the opportunities and challenges posed by the use of PHR with migrants. It draws on a broad literature to provide examples of successful PHR with migrants and highlights critical issues for consideration. FINDINGS: Successful initiatives illustrate the value of engaging migrants in the definition of the research agenda, the design and implementation of health interventions, the identification of health‐protective factors and the operationalization and validation of indicators to monitor progress. Within increasingly super diverse contexts, fragmented community landscapes that are not necessarily constructed along ethnicity traits, inadequate structures of representation, local tensions and operational barriers can hamper meaningful PHR with migrants. CONCLUSION: For each research context, it is essential to gauge the 'optimal' level and type of participation that is more likely to leverage migrants' empowerment. The development of Monitoring and Evaluation tools and methodological strategies to manage inter‐stakeholder discrepancies and knowledge translation gaps are steps in this direction. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This paper draws from contributions of migrant populations and other stakeholders to policymaking.

Funding Information: We acknowledge the contributions of members of the International Collaboration for Participatory Health Research (ICPHR) who provided comments on a draft version of this paper which was distributed at the ICPHR 10th Annual Working Meeting at Morgan State University in Baltimore, Maryland, USA (21st-22nd June, 2019). Publisher Copyright: © 2021 The Authors. Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. ; Context: Migration is one of the most politically pressing issues of the 21st century but migrant health remains an under-researched area. The International Collaboration for Participatory Health Research (ICPHR) working group on migration developed this position statement to address opportunities and challenges in relation to migrant health. It aims to contribute to a shift from a deficit model that sees migrants as passively affected by policies to their reconceptualization as citizens who are engaged in the co-creation of solutions. Methods: This paper examines the opportunities and challenges posed by the use of PHR with migrants. It draws on a broad literature to provide examples of successful PHR with migrants and highlights critical issues for consideration. Findings: Successful initiatives illustrate the value of engaging migrants in the definition of the research agenda, the design and implementation of health interventions, the identification of health-protective factors and the operationalization and validation of indicators to monitor progress. Within increasingly super diverse contexts, fragmented community landscapes that are not necessarily constructed along ethnicity traits, inadequate structures of representation, local tensions and operational barriers can hamper meaningful PHR with migrants. Conclusion: For each research context, it is essential to gauge the 'optimal' level and type of participation that is more likely to leverage migrants' empowerment. The development of Monitoring and Evaluation tools and methodological strategies to manage inter-stakeholder discrepancies and knowledge translation gaps are steps in this direction. Patient or public contribution: This paper draws from contributions of migrant populations and other stakeholders to policymaking. ; publishersversion ; published

peer-reviewed ; Context: Migration is one of the most politically pressing issues of the 21st century but migrant health remains an under-researched area. The International Collaboration for Participatory Health Research (ICPHR) working group on migration developed this position statement to address opportunities and challenges in relation to migrant health. It aims to contribute to a shift from a deficit model that sees migrants as pas sively affected by policies to their reconceptualization as citizens who are engaged in the co-creation of solutions. Methods: This paper examines the opportunities and challenges posed by the use of PHR with migrants. It draws on a broad literature to provide examples of successful PHR with migrants and highlights critical issues for consideration. Findings: Successful initiatives illustrate the value of engaging migrants in the defini tion of the research agenda, the design and implementation of health interventions, the identification of health-protective factors and the operationalization and vali dation of indicators to monitor progress. Within increasingly super diverse contexts, fragmented community landscapes that are not necessarily constructed along eth nicity traits, inadequate structures of representation, local tensions and operational barriers can hamper meaningful PHR with migrants. Conclusion: For each research context, it is essential to gauge the 'optimal' level and type of participation that is more likely to leverage migrants' empowerment. The development of Monitoring and Evaluation tools and methodological strategies to manage inter-stakeholder discrepancies and knowledge translation gaps are steps in this direction. Patient or public contribution: This paper draws from contributions of migrant popu lations and other stakeholders to policymaking.

Ireland is a small country with a history of a social partnership approach to policy making. This paper considers how the ambition of government to utilise an evidence-based approach to policy making plays out against this partnership agenda. Drawing on the authors' experiences and personal reflections, the paper considers how these issues operate within a number of health and social inclusion policy areas, and it explores the role of stakeholders' expectations and involvement in generating evidence for policy.

peer-reviewed ; Background: In the European Union (EU), discrimination based on racial and ethnic origin is prohibited under the Racial Equality Directive. Ireland is one of only three EU countries where a legal duty of equality data collection is placed on public bodies. It provides an important context in which to study ethnic equality monitoring; however no systematic mapping of where it occurs in health information systems has been carried out. The aim of this study is to identify all existing national health and social care data collections with information on ethnicity and to explore how this data has been collected and used. Methods: An electronic search of a national catalogue of health and social care data collections (N = 97) was carried out to identify any collections which contained information on ethnicity. Data dictionaries were searched and key informants contacted. For each of the data collections that collected information on ethnicity, data was extracted on the ethnic categories used and how this data is collected; the completeness of ethnicity recording; and other measures related to ethnicity in the data collection. Relevant outputs for these data collections, related to ethnicity, were identified through key informants and electronic searches. Results: Of the 97 data collections, 14 (14%) collected information on ethnic or cultural background. Country of birth was collected by 10 of these 14 data collections. Most used the ethnic categories in the Census and recommended that ethnicity should be self-identified and not assigned. Reported rates of identification were generally high (≥90%). Data collections which recorded ethnicity tended to be focused on potentially high-risk populations with no routine recording in primary care. There were some examples of where ethnic equality monitoring had informed targeted interventions e.g. vaccination awareness initiatives or cultural training for healthcare staff. Conclusions: Despite strong policy and legal imperatives, there is limited data ...

peer-reviewed ; Objective: This study aimed to explore whether positive impacts were sustained and unanticipated ripple effects had occurred four years after the implementation of interventions to improve cross-cultural communication in primary care. Background: Sustaining the implementation of change using complex interventions is challenging. The EU-funded "RESTORE" study implemented guidelines and training on cross-cultural communication in five Primary Care sites in Europe, combining implementation theory (Normalisation Process Theory) with participatory methodology (participatory learning and action—PLA). There were positive impacts on knowledge, skills and clinical routines. Design, setting and participants: Four of the five original sites (England, Ireland, Greece, The Netherlands) were available for this qualitative follow-up study. The study population (N = 44) was primary healthcare staff and migrants, most of whom had participated in RESTORE. Intervention; main outcome measures: PLA-style focus groups and interviews explored routine practice during consultations with migrants. Etic cards based on the effects of RESTORE stimulated the discussion. Deductive framework analysis was performed in each country followed by comparative data analysis and synthesis. Results: Changes in knowledge, attitudes and behaviour with regard to consultations with migrants were sustained and migrants felt empowered by their participation in RESTORE. There were ongoing concerns about macro level factors, like the political climate and financial policies, negatively affecting migrant healthcare. Conclusion: There were sustained effects in clinical settings, and additional unanticipated positive ripple effects, due in part, from the participatory approach employed ; PUBLISHED ; peer-reviewed

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore whether positive impacts were sustained and unanticipated ripple effects had occurred four years after the implementation of interventions to improve cross‐cultural communication in primary care. BACKGROUND: Sustaining the implementation of change using complex interventions is challenging. The EU‐funded "RESTORE" study implemented guidelines and training on cross‐cultural communication in five Primary Care sites in Europe, combining implementation theory (Normalisation Process Theory) with participatory methodology (participatory learning and action—PLA). There were positive impacts on knowledge, skills and clinical routines. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Four of the five original sites (England, Ireland, Greece, The Netherlands) were available for this qualitative follow‐up study. The study population (N = 44) was primary healthcare staff and migrants, most of whom had participated in RESTORE. INTERVENTION; MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: PLA‐style focus groups and interviews explored routine practice during consultations with migrants. Etic cards based on the effects of RESTORE stimulated the discussion. Deductive framework analysis was performed in each country followed by comparative data analysis and synthesis. RESULTS: Changes in knowledge, attitudes and behaviour with regard to consultations with migrants were sustained and migrants felt empowered by their participation in RESTORE. There were ongoing concerns about macro level factors, like the political climate and financial policies, negatively affecting migrant healthcare. CONCLUSION: There were sustained effects in clinical settings, and additional unanticipated positive ripple effects, due in part, from the participatory approach employed.

peer-reviewed ; Objectives: Guidelines and training initiatives (G/TIs) are available to support communication in crosscultural consultations but are rarely implemented in routine practice in primary care. As part of the European Union RESTORE project, our objective was to explore whether the available G/TIs make sense to migrants and other key stakeholders and whether they could collectively choose G/TIs and engage in their implementation in primary care settings.

Objectives: Guidelines and training initiatives (G/TIs) are available to support communication in cross-cultural consultations but are rarely implemented in routine practice in primary care. As part of the European Union RESTORE project, our objective was to explore whether the available G/TIs make sense to migrants and other key stakeholders and whether they could collectively choose G/TIs and engage in their implementation in primary care settings. Setting: As part of a comparative analysis of 5 linked qualitative case studies, we used purposeful and snowball sampling to recruit migrants and other key stakeholders in primary care settings in Austria, England, Greece, Ireland and the Netherlands. Participants: A total of 78 stakeholders participated in the study (Austria 15, England 9, Ireland 11, Greece 16, Netherlands 27), covering a range of groups (migrants, general practitioners, nurses, administrative staff, interpreters, health service planners). Primary and secondary outcome measures: We combined Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) and Participatory Learning and Action (PLA) research to conduct a series of PLA style focus groups. Using a standardised protocol, stakeholders' discussions about a set of G/TIs were recorded on PLA commentary charts and their selection process was recorded through a PLA direct-ranking technique. We performed inductive and deductive thematic analysis to investigate sensemaking and engagement with the G/TIs. Results: The need for new ways of working was strongly endorsed by most stakeholders. Stakeholders considered that they were the right people to drive the work forward and were keen to enrol others to support the implementation work. This was evidenced by the democratic selection by stakeholders in each setting of one G/TI as a local implementation project. Conclusions: This theoretically informed participatory approach used across 5 countries with diverse healthcare systems could be used in other settings to establish positive conditions for the start of implementation journeys for G/TIs to improve healthcare for migrants. ; (VLID)6065982

Objectives: Guidelines and training initiatives (G/TIs) are available to support communication in cross-cultural consultations but are rarely implemented in routine practice in primary care. As part of the European Union RESTORE project, our objective was to explore whether the available G/TIs make sense to migrants and other key stakeholders and whether they could collectively choose G/TIs and engage in their implementation in primary care settings. Setting: As part of a comparative analysis of 5 linked qualitative case studies, we used purposeful and snowball sampling to recruit migrants and other key stakeholders in primary care settings in Austria, England, Greece, Ireland and the Netherlands. Participants: A total of 78 stakeholders participated in the study (Austria 15, England 9, Ireland 11, Greece 16, Netherlands 27), covering a range of groups (migrants, general practitioners, nurses, administrative staff, interpreters, health service planners). Primary and secondary outcome measures: We combined Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) and Participatory Learning and Action (PLA) research to conduct a series of PLA style focus groups. Using a standardised protocol, stakeholders' discussions about a set of G/TIs were recorded on PLA commentary charts and their selection process was recorded through a PLA direct-ranking technique. We performed inductive and deductive thematic analysis to investigate sensemaking and engagement with the G/TIs. Results: The need for new ways of working was strongly endorsed by most stakeholders. Stakeholders considered that they were the right people to drive the work forward and were keen to enrol others to support the implementation work. This was evidenced by the democratic selection by stakeholders in each setting of one G/TI as a local implementation project. Conclusions: This theoretically informed participatory approach used across 5 countries with diverse healthcare systems could be used in other settings to establish positive conditions for the start of implementation journeys for G/TIs to improve healthcare for migrants.