Guiding Principles for Writing About Immigrants and Immigrant Health.

This perspective identifies harmful phrasing and frames in current clinician and researcher work relating to immigrant health and provides equity-centered alternatives. Recommendations are organized within two broad categories, one focused on shifting terminology toward more humanizing language and the second focused on changing frames around immigration discourse. With regards to shifting terminology, this includes: 1) avoiding language that conflates immigrants with criminality (i.e., "illegal"); 2) using person-first language (i.e., "person applying for asylum" or "detained person" rather than "asylum-seeker" or "detainee"); 3) avoiding comparisons to "native" populations to mean non-foreign-born populations, as this contributes to the erasure of Native Americans and indigenous people; 4) avoiding hyperbolic and stigmatizing "crisis" language about immigrants; and 5) understanding inherent limitations of terms like "refugee," "asylum seeker," "undocumented" that are legal not clinical terms. With regards to challenging dominant frames, recommendations include: 6) avoiding problematization of certain borders compared to others (i.e., U.S.-Mexico versus U.S.- Canada border) that contributes to selectively subjecting people to heightened surveillance; 7) recognizing the heterogeneity among immigrants, such as varying reasons for migration along a continuum of agency, ranging from voluntary to involuntary; 8) avoiding setting up a refugee vs. migrant dichotomy, such that only the former is worthy of sympathy; and 9) representing mistrust among immigrants as justified, instead shifting focus to clinicians, researchers, and healthcare systems who must build or rebuild trustworthiness. Ensuring inclusive and humanizing language use and frames is one critical dimension of striving for immigrant health equity.

Immigration-related Legal Collaboration in Primary Care: Evaluating Impact on Knowledge and Well-being.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of embedding an immigration attorney in a primary care clinic to address immigration-related legal needs. METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods study of 42 legal clinic participants from May 2019-February 2020. Measures included psychological distress, understanding of legal options, and self-rated general health collected prior to, following, and 60-90 days after consultation. RESULTS: There was significant improvement in participants' understanding of their legal immigration options pre- (4.9, SD 2.9) and post-consult (8.6, SD 2.1), and 60 days later (7.0, SD 2.8) (F=11.0, p<.05), but self-rated health scores and distress did not significantly improve, although there was a high loss-to-follow up rate at 60 days (42.8%). Qualitative results underscored the interconnectedness of immigration status and health. DISCUSSION: Embedding immigration legal services in primary care improved patients' understanding of immigration-related legal options, although successfully mitigating the health impacts of vulnerable immigration status may take broader societal interventions.

Embedding Chaplaincy Services in Primary Care for Immigrants, Refugees and Asylum Seekers: A Boston Pilot Intervention.

This Boston-based pilot research was an exploratory study that integrated outpatient chaplaincy into a refugee and immigrant health primary care clinic. Patients were screened for spiritual distress and offered a meeting with chaplaincy interns. Forty-eight patients were seen in clinic, 28 were screened, and 9 met with a chaplain. Most frequent domains of spiritual distress were grief (n = 8), feelings of abandonment (n = 5), guilt (n = 4), betrayal (n = 4), fear of death (n = 3), shame (n = 3), and trust (n = 3). Faith was relevant to treatment decision-making for 6 patients. It was found that outpatient chaplaincy services are a feasible intervention to address spiritual distress in immigrant and refugee patients.

COVID-19 Infection and Contact Tracing Among Refugees in the United States, 2020-2021.

Refugees in the United States are believed to be at high risk of COVID-19. A cross-sectional study design was utilized to collect anonymous, online surveys from refugee communities in the United States during December 2020 to January 2021. We invited bilingual community leaders to share the survey link with other refugees aged ≥18 years. We identified factors associated with COVID-19 infection and measured the distribution of contact tracing among those who tested positive. Of 435 refugees who completed the survey, 26.4% reported testing positive for COVID-19. COVID-19 infection was associated with having an infected family member and knowing people in one's immediate social environment who were infected. Among respondents who tested positive, 84.4% reported that they had been contacted for contact tracing. To prepare for future pandemics, public health authorities should continue partner with refugee community leaders and organizations to ensure efficient programs are inclusive of refugee communities.

Impact of United States 2017 Immigration Policy changes on missed appointments at two Massachusetts Safety-Net Hospitals.

INTRODUCTION: Studies have shown mixed findings regarding the impact of immigration policy changes on immigrants' utilization of primary care. METHODS: We used a difference-in-differences analysis to compare changes in missed primary care appointments over time across two groups: patients who received care in Spanish, Portuguese, or Haitian Creole, and non-Hispanic, white patients who received care in English. RESULTS: After adjustment for age, sex, race, insurance, hospital system, and presence of chronic conditions, immigration policy changes were associated with an absolute increase in the missed appointment prevalence of 0.74 percentage points (95% confidence interval: 0.34, 1.15) among Spanish, Portuguese and Haitian-Creole speakers. We estimated that missed appointments due to immigration policy changes resulted in lost revenue of over $185,000. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that immigration policy changes were associated with a significant increase in missed appointments among patients who receive medical care in languages other than English.

Consideration of racism experiences in the implementation of trauma-focused therapy in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: To understand providers' perceptions of how a patient's experience of racism may impact the successful implementation of a brief posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) treatment in the safety net integrated primary care setting. To conduct a developmental formative evaluation prior to a hybrid type I effectiveness-implementation trial. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING: From October 2020 to January 2021, in-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with integrated primary care stakeholders (N = 27) at the largest safety net hospital in New England, where 82% of patients identify as racial or ethnic minorities. STUDY DESIGN: Interviews with clinical stakeholders were used to (a) contextualize current patient and provider experiences and responses to racism, (b) consider how racism may impact PTSD treatment implementation, (c) gather recommendations for potential augmentation to the proposed PTSD treatment (e.g., culturally responsive delivery, cultural adaptation), and (d) gather recommendations for how to shift the integrated primary care practice to an antiracist framework. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Interview data were gathered using remote data collection methods (video conferencing). Participants were hospital employees, including psychologists, social workers, primary care physicians, community health workers, administrators, and operations managers. We used conventional content analysis. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Clinical stakeholders acknowledged the impact of racism, including racial stress and trauma, on patient engagement and noted the potential need to adapt PTSD treatments to enhance engagement. Clinical stakeholders also characterized the harms of racism on patients and providers and provided recommendations such as changes to staff training and hiring practices, examination of racist policies, and increases in support for providers of color. CONCLUSIONS: This study contextualizes providers' perceptions of racism in the integrated primary care practice and provides some suggestions for shifting to an antiracist framework. Our findings also highlight how racism in health care may be a PTSD treatment implementation barrier.

Acceptance of COVID-19 Vaccine Among Refugees in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: Little is known about COVID-19 vaccination intentions among refugee communities in the United States. The objective of this study was to measure COVID-19 vaccination intentions among a sample of refugees in the United States and the reasons for their vaccine acceptance or hesitancy. METHODS: From December 2020 through January 2021, we emailed or text messaged anonymous online surveys to 12 bilingual leaders in the Afghan, Bhutanese, Somali, South Sudanese, and Burmese refugee communities in the United States. We asked community leaders to complete the survey and share the link with community members who met the inclusion criteria (arrived in the United States as refugees, were aged ≥18, and currently lived in the United States). We compared the characteristics of respondents who intended to receive the COVID-19 vaccine with those of respondents who did not intend to receive the vaccine or were unsure. We then conducted crude and adjusted logistic regression analysis to measure the association between employment as an essential worker and COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. RESULTS: Of 435 respondents, 306 (70.3%) indicated that they planned to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Being an essential worker (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.37; 95% CI, 1.44-3.90) and male sex (aOR = 1.87; 95% CI, 1.12-3.12) were significantly associated with higher odds of intending to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Among respondents who intended to receive a COVID-19 vaccine, wanting to protect themselves (68.6%), family members (65.0%), and other people (54.3%) were the main reasons. CONCLUSION: Many refugees who responded to the survey, especially those who worked in essential industries, intended to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Community organizations, health care providers, and public health agencies should work together to ensure that vaccine registration and vaccination sites are accessible to refugees.

Traumatic brain injury and forensic evaluations: Three case studies of U.S. asylum-seekers.

Traumatic brain injuries are common among refugees and asylum-seekers and can result from a range of etiologies, including intimate partner violence, gang violence, war-related trauma, and torture. Regardless of the cause, these injuries often result in a host of neuropsychiatric and other symptoms that may complicate individuals' subsequent health outcomes. For asylum-seekers, documenting prior head trauma is essential to the legal process, since traumatic brain injuries and their subsequent effects on memory and cognition may affect the ability to provide thorough testimony. Using three case vignettes, we explore how to approach the forensic evaluation of asylum-seekers with a history of traumatic brain injury, illustrating the range of etiologies and sequelae of traumatic brain injury in this complex population.