Between Care and Coercion: Asylum Seekers' Experiences With COVID-19 Containment and Mitigation Measures in German Reception Centres.

Objectives: COVID-19 containment and mitigation measures have been criticised for amplifying pre-existing individual and structural vulnerabilities among asylum seekers. We qualitatively explored their experiences with and attitudes towards pandemic measures to inform people-centred responses in future health emergencies. Methods: We interviewed eleven asylum seekers in a German reception centre (July-December 2020). The semi-structured interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analysed thematically with an inductive-deductive approach. Results: Quarantine was experienced as burdensome by participants. Shortcomings in social support, everyday necessities, information, hygiene, and daily activities exacerbated the strains of quarantine. Interviewees held different opinions about the usefulness and appropriateness of the various containment and mitigation measures. These opinions differed by individual risk perception and the measures' comprehensibility and compatibility with personal needs. Power asymmetries related to the asylum system furthermore impacted on preventive behaviour. Conclusion: Quarantine can amplify mental health burdens and power asymmetries and can therefore constitute a considerable stressor for asylum seekers. Provision of diversity-sensitive information, daily necessities, and accessible psychosocial support is required to counteract adverse psychosocial impacts of pandemic measures and safeguard wellbeing in this population.

Resilience of Health Systems: Understanding Uncertainty Uses, Intersecting Crises and Cross-level Interactions Comment on "Government Actions and Their Relation to Resilience in Healthcare During the COVID-19 Pandemic in New South Wales, Australia and Ontario, Canada".

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has created opportunities to study resilience in multiple, interrelated societal systems while considering the institutional, community and individual level. We aim to discuss critical, yet underrepresented, issues in resilience discourses which are fundamental to advance theories, concepts and measurement of health system resilience. These relate to a better understanding of (i) how government's handle and use uncertainties to facilitate or impede change, including the role of negotiation and conflicts, (ii) the intersections of health with multiple, co-occurring crises (systemic intersections), and (iii) cross-level interactions, ie, the interrelation between individual-level resilience, the collective resilience of groups and communities, and the resilience of a system as a whole (and vice versa). Analyses of these aspects can help to "contextualize" our understanding of resilience in complex adaptive systems. However, conceptual clarity is needed whether resilience is considered an underlying feature, outcome, or intermediate determinant of a (health) system's performance.

SARS-CoV-2 attack rate in reception and accommodation centres for asylum seekers during the first wave: Systematic review of outbreak media reports in Germany.

OBJECTIVES: Despite concerns about the impact of the severe acute respiratory syndrome corona virus (SARS-CoV-2) in refugee camps, data on attack rates and effectiveness of containment measures are lacking. We aimed to (1) quantify the attack rate of SARS-CoV-2 during outbreaks in reception and accommodation centres in Germany during the first pandemic wave, (2) assess differences in the attack rate based on containment measures, and (3) provide an overview of testing strategies, communication, conflicts, and protection measures for refugees with special needs. METHODS: Systematic web-based review of outbreak media reports (until June 2020) on confirmed SARS-CoV-2 cases in reception centres for asylum seekers in Germany using the google search engine. Reports were screened for pre-defined inclusion criteria and complemented by snowball searches. Data on facility name, location, confirmed cases, containment measures, communication, protection strategies, and conflicts was extracted for each outbreak and reporting date. Evidence synthesis: meta-analysis and negative binomial regression. FINDINGS: We identified 337 media reports on 101 SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks in 99 reception and accommodation centres in Germany. The pooled SARS-CoV-2 attack rate was 13.1% (95% confidence interval, CI: 9.8-16.7). Outbreak sites implementing mass quarantine (n = 76) showed higher rates (15.7; 95% CI: 11.6-20.2) compared to sites using conventional strategies (6.6; 95% CI: 3.1-11.2), yielding a rate ratio of 0.44 (95% CI: 0.27-0.72) adjusted for testing strategies, type and size of accommodation. Conflicts occurred in at least 11.8% of all outbreaks. Few sites reported specific measures to protect refugees with special needs. CONCLUSION: Mass quarantine is associated with higher attack rates, and appears to be a counter-productive containment measure in overcrowded camps, but further research with individual-level data is required to rule out residual confounding. Despite available vaccines, reception centres and refugee camps should follow the available guidelines on COVID-19 response and refrain from mass quarantine if physical distancing cannot be guaranteed.

Covid-19 pandemic policy monitor (COV-PPM) - European level tracking data of non-pharmaceutical interventions.

The Covid-19 Pandemic Policy Monitor (COV-PPM) dataset prospectively documents non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) taken to contain SARS-Cov-2 transmission across countries in EU27, EEA and UK. In Germany, measures have also been recorded at the federal state and, partially, at the district levels. NPIs implemented since January 2020 have been retrieved and updated weekly from March 2020, from official governments webpages, Ministries of Health, National (Public) Health Institutes or Administrations. NPI categories collected refer to restrictions, closures or changes in functioning implemented in 13 domains: public events (gatherings in indoor or outdoor spaces); public institutions (kindergartens, schools, universities); public spaces (shops, bars, restaurants); public transport (trains, buses, trams, metro); citizens movement/mobility (e.g. pedestrians, cars, ships); border closures (air, land or sea, all incoming travels, from high-risk regions, only non-nationals); measures to improve the healthcare system (e.g. human resources or technical reinforcement, redistribution, material or infrastructural); measures for risk/vulnerable groups (e.g. elderly, chronically ill, pregnant); economic measures (e.g. lay-off rules establishment, actions to avoid job-loss, tax relaxation); testing policies (e.g. testing criteria changes); nose and mouth protection rules, vaccination and others/miscellaneous measures.

SARS-Cov-2 prevalence, transmission, health-related outcomes and control strategies in homeless shelters: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: People experiencing homelessness (PEH) may be at risk for COVID19. We synthesised evidence on SARS-Cov-2 infection, transmission, outcomes of disease, effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPI), and the effectiveness of strategies for infection prevention and control (IPC). METHODS: Systematic review of articles, indexed in electronic databases (EMBASE, WHO-Covid19, Web of Science), institutional websites and the Norwegian Institute of Public Health's live map of COVID-19 evidence, and published from December 1st, 2019, to March 3rd, 2021. Empirical papers of any study design addressing Covid-19 and health(-related) outcomes in PEH or shelters' staff were included. (PROSPERO-2020-CRD42020187033). FINDINGS: Of 536 publications, 37 studies were included (two modelling, 31 observational, four qualitative studies). Random-effect meta-analysis yields a baseline SARS-Cov-2 prevalence of 2•32% (95% Confidence-Interval, 95%CI=1•30-3•34) in PEH and 1•55% (95%CI=0•79-2•31) in staff. In outbreaks, the pooled prevalence increases to 31•59% (95%CI=20•48-42•71) in PEH and 14•80% (95%CI=10•73-18•87) in staff. Main IPC strategies were universal rapid testing, expansion of non-congregate housing, and in-shelter measures (bed spacing, limited staff rotation, reduction in number of residents). INTERPRETATION: 32% of PEH and 15% staff are infected during outbreaks of SARS-Cov-2 in homeless shelters. Most studies were conducted in the USA. No studies were found quantifying health-related outcomes of NPI. Overview and evaluation of IPC strategies for PEH, a better understanding of disease transmission, and reliable data on PEH within Covid-19 notification systems are needed. Qualitative studies may serve to voice PEH and shelter staff experiences, and guide future evaluations and IPC strategies. FUNDING: None.

SARS-CoV-2 among migrants and forcibly displaced populations: A rapid systematic review.

The economic and health consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic pose a particular threat to vulnerable groups, such as migrants, particularly forcibly displaced populations. The aim of this review is (i) to synthesize the evidence on risk of infection and transmission among migrants, refugees, asylum seekers and internally displaced populations, and (ii) the effect of lockdown measures on these populations. We searched MEDLINE and WOS, preprint servers, and pertinent websites between 1st December 2019 and 26th June 2020. The included studies showed a high heterogeneity in study design, population, outcome and quality. The incidence risk of SARS-CoV-2 varied from 0•12% to 2•08% in non-outbreak settings and from 5•64% to 21•15% in outbreak settings. Migrants showed a lower hospitalization rate compared to non-migrants. Negative impacts on mental health due to lockdown measures were found across respective studies. However, findings show a tenuous and heterogeneous data situation, showing the need for more robust and comparative study designs.

Monitoring the spatiotemporal epidemiology of Covid-19 incidence and mortality: A small-area analysis in Germany.

Timely monitoring of incidence risks of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and associated deaths at small-area level is essential to inform containment strategies. We analysed the spatiotemporal epidemiology of the SARSCoV- 2 pandemic at district level in Germany to develop a tool for disease monitoring. We used a Bayesian spatiotemporal model to estimate the district-specific risk ratios (RR) of SARS-CoV-2 incidence and the posterior probability (PP) for exceedance of RR thresholds 1, 2 or 3. Of 220 districts (55% of 401 districts) showing a RR > 1, 188 (47%) exceed the RR threshold with sufficient certainty (PP ≥ 80%) to be considered at high risk. 47 districts show very high (RR > 2, PP ≥ 80%) and 15 extremely high (RR > 3, PP ≥ 80%) risks. The spatial approach for monitoring the risk of SARS-CoV-2 provides an informative basis for local policy planning.

Clinical outcomes and risk factors for COVID-19 among migrant populations in high-income countries: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Migrants in high-income countries may be at increased risk of COVID-19 due to their health and social circumstances, yet the extent to which they are affected and their predisposing risk factors are not clearly understood. We did a systematic review to assess clinical outcomes of COVID-19 in migrant populations, indirect health and social impacts, and to determine key risk factors. METHODS: We did a systematic review following PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO CRD42020222135). We searched multiple databases to 18/11/2020 for peer-reviewed and grey literature on migrants (foreign-born) and COVID-19 in 82 high-income countries. We used our international networks to source national datasets and grey literature. Data were extracted on primary outcomes (cases, hospitalisations, deaths) and we evaluated secondary outcomes on indirect health and social impacts and risk factors using narrative synthesis. RESULTS: 3016 data sources were screened with 158 from 15 countries included in the analysis (35 data sources for primary outcomes: cases [21], hospitalisations [4]; deaths [15]; 123 for secondary outcomes). We found that migrants are at increased risk of infection and are disproportionately represented among COVID-19 cases. Available datasets suggest a similarly disproportionate representation of migrants in reported COVID-19 deaths, as well as increased all-cause mortality in migrants in some countries in 2020. Undocumented migrants, migrant health and care workers, and migrants housed in camps have been especially affected. Migrants experience risk factors including high-risk occupations, overcrowded accommodation, and barriers to healthcare including inadequate information, language barriers, and reduced entitlement. CONCLUSIONS: Migrants in high-income countries are at high risk of exposure to, and infection with, COVID-19. These data are of immediate relevance to national public health and policy responses to the pandemic. Robust data on testing uptake and clinical outcomes in migrants, and barriers and facilitators to COVID-19 vaccination, are urgently needed, alongside strengthening engagement with diverse migrant groups.

[COVID-19 in collective accommodation centres for refugees: assessment of pandemic control measures and priorities from the perspective of authorities]. / COVID-19 in Sammelunterkünften für Geflüchtete: Analyse von Pandemiemaßnahmen und prioritäre Bedarfe aus behördlicher Sicht.

BACKGROUND: The containment of the COVID-19 pandemic in collective accommodation centres is crucial to maintain the physical and mental health of refugees. It is unclear what measures have been taken by authorities in this setting to reduce the risk of infection, minimise stressors for refugees during the pandemic and communicate containment measures. OBJECTIVES: Assessment of measures that have been taken to prevent and contain SARS-CoV­2 in collective accommodation for refugees and identification of support required by authorities. METHODS: Qualitative interview study with 48 representatives responsible for the reception and accommodation of refugees. Individual interviews were transcribed verbatim and evaluated using framework analysis. RESULTS: We found substantial heterogeneity of measures taken to prevent infection, inform refugees, maintain social and health services, test for SARS-CoV­2 and quarantine positive cases. Effective intersectoral cooperation proved to be particularly important for coordination and implementation of measures. Need for support was expressed with regard to the improvement of infrastructure, opportunities to work with language interpreters and stronger involvement of local health experts. CONCLUSION: Amidst multiple actors and the complexity of structures and processes, the admission authorities have been taking on essential responsibilities related to infection control on an ad hoc basis, without being sufficiently positioned to do so. In order to further contain the pandemic, a strengthening of centralised, setting-specific recommendations and information as well as their translation through the pro-active involvement of the public health authorities at the local level are essential.

Towards inclusionary and diversity-sensitive public health: the consequences of exclusionary othering in public health using the example of COVID-19 management in German reception centres and asylum camps.

The German government's response to the COVID-19 pandemic has been predominantly considered wellfounded. Still, the practice of mass quarantine in reception centres and asylum camps has been criticised for its discrimination of refugees and asylum seekers. Building on the concept of othering, this article argues that processes of othering are structurally anchored in German asylum regulations and they have further pervaded public health measures against COVID-19. The practice of mass quarantine made the negative consequences of exclusionary othering for public health particularly noticeable. In the light of recent data indicating this measure to be epidemiologically, legally and ethically insufficient, we apply the concept of othering to public health and discuss (1) exclusionary, (2) inclusionary and (3) diversity-sensitive approaches to public health. We finally conclude that a shift of perspective from exclusion to inclusion, from subordination to empowerment and from silencing to participation is urgently required.

Economic arguments in migrant health policymaking: proposing a research agenda.

Welfare states around the world restrict access to public healthcare for some migrant groups. Formal restrictions on migrants' healthcare access are often justified with economic arguments; for example, as a means to prevent excess costs and safeguard scarce resources. However, existing studies on the economics of migrant health policies suggest that restrictive policies increase rather than decrease costs. This evidence has largely been ignored in migration debates. Amplifying the relationship between welfare state transformations and the production of inequalities, the Covid-19 pandemic may fuel exclusionary rhetoric and politics; or it may serve as an impetus to reconsider the costs that one group's exclusion from health can entail for all members of society.The public health community has a responsibility to promote evidence-informed health policies that are ethically and economically sound, and to counter anti-migrant and racial discrimination (whether overt or masked with economic reasoning). Toward this end, we propose a research agenda which includes 1) the generation of a comprehensive body of evidence on economic aspects of migrant health policies, 2) the clarification of the role of economic arguments in migration debates, 3) (self-)critical reflection on the ethics and politics of the production of economic evidence, 4) the introduction of evidence into migrant health policymaking processes, and 5) the endorsement of inter- and transdisciplinary approaches. With the Covid-19 pandemic and surrounding events rendering the suggested research agenda more topical than ever, we invite individuals and groups to join forces toward a (self-)critical examination of economic arguments in migration and health, and in public health generally.

[Covid-19 in Refugee Shelters: The German Public Health Service Needs Strengthening Now]. / Covid-19 in Flüchtlingsunterkünften: ÖGD jetzt weiter stärken.

The Covid-19 pandemic poses a major challenge for the management of collective accommodation centres for refugees. The often-overcrowded facilities hinder satisfactory implementation of social distancing and hygiene practices. Adequate information policies as well as a rapid, efficient management of suspected and confirmed Covid-19 cases are essential. However, scientific evidence on this is largely lacking. Besides partially implemented approaches, such as isolation areas or cluster quarantine, plans to evacuate overcrowded facilities should also be considered. The German Public Health Service (ÖGD) plays a vital role in the current Covid-19 pandemic. In order to fulfil their routine tasks of infection control and support health services management for refugee accommodation centres, the ÖGD urgently needs to be strengthened in terms of personnel and material. Additionally, means for a rapid exchange of best practice examples of Covid-19 interventions across federal states as well as collaborative structures and capacity within the ÖGD for accompanying operational research are needed. Refugees, their housing situation and their access to health care need to be included in pandemic plans. Only an integrative health care system can achieve regional and international targets for the control of Covid-19 and other infectious diseases.