Implementing a Non-Specialist Delivered Psychological Intervention for Young Adolescents in a Protracted Refugee Setting: a Qualitative Process Evaluation in Lebanon.

There has been an increase in the evaluation and implementation of non-specialist delivered psychological interventions to address unmet mental health needs in humanitarian emergencies. While randomized controlled trials (RCTs) provide important evidence about intervention impact, complementary qualitative process evaluations are essential to understand key implementation processes and inform future scaling up of the intervention. This study was conducted as part of an RCT of the Early Adolescents Skills for Emotions (EASE) psychological intervention for young adolescents with elevated psychological distress (predominantly with a Syrian refugee background) in Lebanon. Our aims were firstly to conduct a qualitative process evaluation to understand stakeholder experiences and perceived impact of the intervention and identify barriers and facilitators for implementation, and secondly to explore considerations for scaling up. Eleven key informant interviews and seven focus groups were conducted with 39 respondents including adolescent and caregiver participants, trainers, providers, outreach workers, and local stakeholders. Data were analyzed using inductive and deductive thematic analysis. Respondents perceived the intervention to be highly needed and reported improvements in adolescent mental health and wellbeing. Key implementation factors that have potential to influence engagement, adherence, and perceived impact included the socio-economic situation of families, mental health stigma, coordination within and between sectors (particularly for scaling up), embedding the intervention within existing service pathways, having clear quality and accountability processes including training and supervision for non-specialists, and sustainable funding. Our findings provide important context for understanding effectiveness outcomes of the RCT and highlights factors that need to be considered when implementing a mental health intervention on a larger scale in a complex crisis.

Interventions to improve access to primary care for inclusion health groups in England: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Everyone in England has the right to primary care without financial charges. Nevertheless, evidence shows that barriers remain for inclusion health populations such as vulnerable migrants, people experiencing homelessness, Gypsy, Roma, and Traveller (GRT) communities, and people who sell sex. There is little evidence for what works to improve access. This study was a scoping review of interventions to improve access to mainstream primary care for inclusion health groups in England. METHODS: In this scoping review, we searched databases (Embase, Medline, APA PsychInfo, the Cochrane Collaboration Library, Web of Science and CINAHL) and grey literature sources, including the National Health Service and National Institute for Clinical Excellence, for articles published in English between Jan 1, 2010, and Dec 31, 2020, with no limit on study design. Data were extracted according to inclusion criteria, including interventions taking place in England and targeting people with insecure immigration status, people who sell sex, people experiencing homelessness, and GRT communities. Results were presented in a narrative synthesis. FINDINGS: 39 studies describing one or more interventions were included: four peer-reviewed articles (one randomised trial, two quality improvement projects, and one mixed-methods study protocol) and 25 grey literature items (38 interventions in total). Interventions mostly targeted people with insecure immigration status (17/38, 45%), and a majority (12/38, 32%) took place in London. The most common types of intervention were training, education, and resources (such as leaflets or websites) for patients or staff (25/38, 66%), and most interventions targeted GP registration processes (28/38, 74%). Interventions commonly involved voluntary and community sector organisations (16/38, 42%). Most interventions were not evaluated to understand their effectiveness (23/38, 61%). Sources with evaluations identified staff training, direct patient advocacy, and involvement of people with lived experience as effective elements. INTERPRETATION: Interventions to improve access to primary care for inclusion health groups in England were heterogeneous, commonly undertaken at community level, and developed to serve local inclusion health groups. Considerations for policymakers and practitioners include groups and geographical areas less commonly included in interventions, the elements of positive practice identified in evaluations, and the need for evaluation of future interventions. FUNDING: National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR 202050).

Perspectives on registration to primary care from inclusion health groups in England: a mixed-method study.

BACKGROUND: Although everyone living in the UK is entitled to access free primary care within the National Health Service (NHS), evidence shows that people in need of health care are wrongly being refused access. This study aimed to explore the perspectives of individuals from inclusion health groups on primary care registration and accessibility. METHODS: This was a mixed-methods study. From Oct 5, 2022, to Feb 20, 2023, we surveyed 49 people (36 [73%] men; 12 [24%] women) and interviewed 25 other (14 [56%] men; 11 [44%] women) who were service users of the University College London Hospital Find & Treat mobile service. This service included people with lived experience of homelessness, asylum seeking, addiction, selling sex, and irregular immigration. We recruited these participants through hostels for people with ongoing addiction and complex needs, initial asylum accommodation centres, and day shelters. Our research team included two peer researchers. FINDINGS: Of those surveyed, 25 (51%) perceived their access to primary health-care services as good, and 17 (35%) reported obstacles to going to the general practitioner (GP). Participants described multiple barriers to registering for GP surgeries, including a lack of understanding and poor communication with NHS services, a fear of discrimination, and a lack of digital access that prevents information seeking and access to services. Respondents also reported using emergency services instead of primary care because they were more immediately accessible without previous registration. Facilitators to GP registration included one-on-one support and outreach work that helps people navigate into services and know their rights, and the use of specialist GP services, which are perceived as more accepting, especially for people experiencing homelessness. INTERPRETATION: The barriers to registration identified are related to both individual and group level characteristics and produce both similar and divergent needs between different inclusion health groups. The need for additional support during registration was clear, and our work highlights the requirement for interventions to improve access to primary care for underserved groups, as well as coordinated policy action. One-on-one support in particular, either outreach or provided in services where inclusion health groups spend time, appears to be a key facilitator to ensuring comprehensive and fast access to GP services. FUNDING: National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR).

Lessons learned from co-production in public health research: the MAMAH case study involving underserved migrant mothers in the UK.

BACKGROUND: Research suggests some migrant women are at increased risk of mortality and morbidity in the perinatal period; however, there is a gap in co-produced research to improve care. The UK National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) defines co-production as "an approach in which researchers, practitioners, and members of the public work together, sharing power and responsibility". We summarise learnings from our study, which aimed to co-produce solutions to improve maternity care for migrant women in the UK, by working with women to identify the most important research priorities. METHODS: We recruited 18 underserved migrant women living in the UK who had given birth in the UK within the past 15 years to create a patient advisory panel. They were recruited via national and local non-governmental organisations and snowball sampling using purposive methods to ensure representation from a range of backgrounds, including those who were refugees, asylum seekers, and undocumented. Underserved was defined as asylum seeking, refugee, undocumented, or low-income mothers (those who were experiencing homelessness or in receipt of welfare support). The women are involved in conceptualisation, analysis, and dissemination of the project. The project is a UK National Institute of Health and Care Research (NIHR) Doctoral Fellowship project lasting 3 years with a variety of research workstreams. FINDINGS: The research funding application process began in January, 2021, and the project was funded and began in November, 2022. The research team struggled to access comprehensive training on co-production, particularly in how to counter power dynamics. We appointed a Lead Patient Advisor who manages the relationship between the academics and the patient advisors. Additionally, we reimburse women's time, childcare, and travel. We have found that online meetings are preferable, as women do not need to travel or arrange childcare. We meet our patient advisory panel four times per year. Some women have been directly involved in research such as systematic review screening and qualitative interviewing and have been given research training. Our initial research priorities did not align with those of the women, and this helped us to reshape our work. Women said that having a Lead Patient Advisor made it easier to participate, particularly as some issues are traumatic. To mitigate this, we have offered support resources and debriefing. Using online interpreters has been challenging, and we have recently split into different language groups to maximise engagement. INTERPRETATION: Overall, as researchers, we have learned that taking a truly co-produced approach is time-consuming but has ensured our research prioritises the views of migrant women giving birth in the UK. FUNDING: National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR).

Interventions to improve perinatal outcomes among migrant women in high-income countries: a systematic review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Women who are migrants and who are pregnant or postpartum are at high risk of poorer perinatal outcomes compared with host country populations due to experiencing numerous additional stressors including social exclusion and language barriers. High-income countries (HICs) host many migrants, including forced migrants who may face additional challenges in the peripartum period. Although HICs' maternity care systems are often well developed, they are not routinely tailored to the needs of migrant women. The primary objective will be to determine what interventions exist to improve perinatal outcomes for migrant women in HICs. The secondary objective will be to explore the effectiveness of these interventions by exploring the impact on perinatal outcomes. The main outcomes of interest will be rates of preterm birth, birth weight, and number of antenatal or postnatal appointments attended. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This protocol follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Protocols guidelines. EMBASE, EMCARE, MEDLINE and PsycINFO, CENTRAL, Scopus, CINAHL Plus, and Web of Science, as well as grey literature sources will be searched from inception up to December 2022. We will include randomised controlled trials, quasi-experimental and interventional studies of interventions, which aim to improve perinatal outcomes in any HIC. There will be no language restrictions. We will exclude studies presenting only qualitative outcomes and those including mixed populations of migrant and non-migrant women. Screening and data extraction will be completed by two independent reviewers and risk of bias will be assessed using the Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. If a collection of suitably comparable outcomes is retrieved, we will perform meta-analysis applying a random effects model. Presentation of results will comply with guidelines in the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews of Interventions and the PRISMA statement. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required. Results will be submitted for peer-reviewed publication and presented at national and international conferences. The findings will inform the work of the Lancet Migration European Hub. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022380678.

The global burden of perinatal common mental health disorders and substance use among migrant women: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There are one billion migrants globally, of whom 82 million are forced migrants. Pregnant migrants face pre-migration stressors such as conflict, transit stressors including poverty, and post-migration stressors including navigating the immigration system; these stressors can make them vulnerable to mental illness. We aimed to assess the global prevalence of and risk factors for perinatal mental health disorders or substance use among women who are migrants. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched OVID MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CENTRAL, Global Health, Scopus, and Web of Science for studies published from database inception until July 8, 2022. Cohort, cross-sectional, and interventional studies with prevalence data for any mental illness in pregnancy or the postnatal period (ie, up to a year after delivery) or substance use in pregnancy were included. The primary outcome was the prevalence of perinatal common mental health disorders among women who are migrants, globally. Data for study quality and risk factors were also extracted. A random-effects meta-analysis was used to calculate pooled prevalence estimates, when appropriate. Sensitivity analyses were conducted according to study quality, sample representativeness, and method of outcome assessment. Risk factor data were synthesised narratively. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021226291. FINDINGS: 18 650 studies were retrieved, of which 135 studies comprising data from 621 995 participants met the inclusion criteria. 123 (91%) of 135 studies were conducted in high-income host countries. Five (4%) of 135 studies were interventional, 40 (30%) were cohort, and 90 (66%) were cross-sectional. The most common regions of origin of participants were South America, the Middle East, and north Africa. Only 26 studies presented disaggregated data for forced migrants or economic migrants. The pooled prevalence of perinatal depressive disorders was 24·2% (range 0·5-95·5%; I2 98·8%; τ2 0·01) among all women who are migrants, 32·5% (1·5-81·6; 98·7%; 0·01) among forced migrants, and 13·7% (4·7-35·1; 91·5%; 0·01) among economic migrants (p<0·001). The pooled prevalence of perinatal anxiety disorders was 19·6% (range 1·2-53·1; I2 96·8%; τ2 0·01) among all migrants. The pooled prevalence of perinatal post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) among all migrant women was 8·9% (range 3·2-33·3; I2 97·4%; τ2 0·18). The pooled prevalence of perinatal PTSD among forced migrants was 17·1% (range 6·5-44·3; I2 96·6%; τ2 0·32). Key risk factors for perinatal depression were being a recently arrived immigrant (ie, approximately within the past year), having poor social support, and having a poor relationship with one's partner. INTERPRETATION: One in four women who are migrants and who are pregnant or post partum experience perinatal depression, one in five perinatal anxiety, and one in 11 perinatal PTSD. The burden of perinatal mental illness appears higher among women who are forced migrants compared with women who are economic migrants. To our knowledge, we have provided the first pooled estimate of perinatal depression and PTSD among women who are forced migrants. Interpreting the prevalence estimate should be observed with caution due to the very wide range found within the included studies. Additionally, 66% of studies were cross-sectional representing low quality evidence. These findings highlight the need for community-based routine perinatal mental health screening for migrant communities, and access to interventions that are culturally sensitive, particularly for forced migrants who might experience a higher burden of disease than economic migrants. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR); March of Dimes European Preterm Birth Research Centre, Imperial College; Imperial College NIHR Biomedical Research Centre; and Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford.

New research on the global prevalence of female genital mutilation/cutting: Research, clinical, and policy implications.

In this perspective, Kerrie Stevenson and Brenda Kelly discuss new research on the prevalence of female genital mutilation/cutting alongside clinical and policy implications.

Prioritising women's and girls' health in disaster settings: Lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic and the overlapping crises affecting Beirut, Lebanon.

The COVID-19 pandemic has placed strain on healthcare systems across the world; however, countries experiencing overlapping crises such as economic or political unrest face immense pressure in ensuring routine healthcare services can continue to operate. Despite being less likely suffer severe disease or die from COVID-19, data suggest women have experienced poorer mental health, higher rates of unemployment, and more social isolation during the pandemic. In general, we know women and girls experience multiple forms of disadvantage in disaster contexts including being more likely to become homeless, work as an unpaid carer, and to experience poverty. Research from previous disaster contexts has demonstrated that women's healthcare services tend to be deprioritised in the emergency response, and reports suggest this has been the case during the COVID-19 pandemic. This paper highlights key priorities for safeguarding women's and girls' health in disaster contexts, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, by drawing on learning from the multiple crises facing Beirut, including responding to the pandemic, economic collapse, and the Beirut Port Explosion in 2020.

Healthcare cyber-attacks and the COVID-19 pandemic: an urgent threat to global health.

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in widespread disruption to the healthcare industry. Alongside complex issues relating to ensuring sufficient healthcare capacity and resourcing, healthcare organizations and universities are now also facing heightened cyber-security threats in the midst of the pandemic. Since the outbreak began, various healthcare providers and academic institutions across the world have been targeted in a variety of complex and coordinatized cyber-attacks. International and national regulatory bodies have stressed the urgent need for healthcare providers and universities to protect themselves against cyber-attacks during COVID-19, recognizing that a growing number of cyber-criminals are seeking to capitalize on the vulnerabilities of the healthcare sector during this period. This includes a desire to steal intellectual property such as data relating to COVID-19 vaccine development, modelling and experimental therapeutics. It is therefore essential that healthcare providers and universities ensure they are informed, protected and prepared to respond to any cyber-threat. This article outlines key COVID-19 cyber-security principles for both healthcare organizations and academic institutions.

Psychological Distress among Syrian Refugee Women and a Control Group in an Urban Settlement in Beirut- a Pilot Study.

The Syrian conflict has created approximately five million refugees. Of these, more than one million have settled in Lebanon. This project aimed to determine the prevalence of psychological distress (PD) amongst Syrian refugee mothers compared to a control group of local mothers living in the same informal urban settlement in Beirut. A convenient sample was selected from a primary care center. The General Health Questionnaire-12 items (GHQ-12) was administered to determine PD amongst women who were pregnant within 2 years of the study. Data was analyzed using SPSS. Sixty women were enrolled; 35 were Syrian refugees. All women had PD. The mean GHQ-12 scores were 7.5 and 7.2 for the control and Syrian refugee mothers, respectively. When asked about stressors, 91.7% of the women stated poverty. Syrian refugee women had similar PD as women who were not displaced and did not experience direct war related hostilities.

High rates of maternal depression amongst Syrian refugees in Lebanon - a pilot study.

This pilot study compares symptoms of depression and risk factors amongst Syrian refugees and low-income Lebanese mothers accessing a primary care centre in Beirut between January and June 2018. Women who gave birth in the previous two years or who were currently pregnant were included in the study. Depressive symptoms were assessed using the Arabic Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS). Correlations between EPDS score and sociodemographic and mental health variables were analysed using Pearson's coefficient and ANOVA. 35 Syrian and 25 Lebanese women were recruited, 15 of whom were pregnant. EPDS scores were high in the whole group (mean 16.12 (SD 7.72), n = 60). Scores were higher amongst Syrian refugees than Lebanese mothers (17.77, SD 7.66 vs, 13.80, SD 7.34, p < 0.05). Illegal residence (p < 0.001), domestic violence (p < 0.05) and a history of mental illness (p < 0.01) were associated with higher scores. This pilot study demonstrates high rates of symptoms of depression amongst mothers in this population. Symptoms were particularly prevalent amongst Syrian refugees; three-quarters were 'probably depressed' and would warrant psychiatric assessment. This highlights the importance of improved mental healthcare for refugee mothers, the importance of addressing the social determinants of maternal mental health and further research into the effects of depression on these women and their children.

Does attendance at a specialist antenatal clinic improve clinical outcomes in women with class III obesity compared with standard care? A retrospective case-note analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether attendance at a specialised multidisciplinary antenatal clinic for women with class III obesity (BMI >40 kg/m2) is associated with improved clinical outcomes compared with standard antenatal care. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using routinely collected data from electronic patient record. SETTING: Community and hospital based antenatal care. PARTICIPANTS: Women with a singleton pregnancy with class III obesity booked for antenatal care and delivered in one of two hospitals in NHS Lothian, Scotland, UK between 2008 and 2014. Maternal and offspring outcomes were compared in women who attended a specialised obesity clinic (n=511) compared with standard antenatal care (n=502). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Included stillbirth, low birth weight, gestational diabetes, induction of labour and caesarean section. RESULTS: Compared with standard care, women receiving specialist care were less likely to have a stillbirth (OR 0.12, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.97) and a low birthweight baby (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.99) and more likely to be screened for (100% vs 73.6%; p<0.001) and diagnosed with (26.0% vs 12.5%; p<0.001) gestational diabetes, to require induction of labour (38.4% vs 29.9%; p=0.009), an elective (20.3% vs 17.7%; p<0.001) and emergency (23.9% vs 20.3%; p<0.001) caesarean section and attend antenatal triage one or more times during pregnancy (77.7% vs 53.1%; p<0.001). Women attending the specialist clinic had a higher BMI (44.5 kg/m2 (4.3) vs 43.2 kg/m2 (3.1); p<0.001) and were more likely to be nulliparous (46.0% vs 24.9%; p<0.001). There were no other differences in maternal demographic or maternal and offspring outcomes between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Attendance at a specialised antenatal clinic for obesity is associated with reduced rates of stillbirth and low birth weight and improved detection of gestational diabetes. The improvement in clinical outcomes is associated with an increase in healthcare attendance to obstetric triage and clinical interventions including induction of labour and caesarean section.

Analgesic exposure in pregnant rats affects fetal germ cell development with inter-generational reproductive consequences.

Analgesics which affect prostaglandin (PG) pathways are used by most pregnant women. As germ cells (GC) undergo developmental and epigenetic changes in fetal life and are PG targets, we investigated if exposure of pregnant rats to analgesics (indomethacin or acetaminophen) affected GC development and reproductive function in resulting offspring (F1) or in the F2 generation. Exposure to either analgesic reduced F1 fetal GC number in both sexes and altered the tempo of fetal GC development sex-dependently, with delayed meiotic entry in oogonia but accelerated GC differentiation in males. These effects persisted in adult F1 females as reduced ovarian and litter size, whereas F1 males recovered normal GC numbers and fertility by adulthood. F2 offspring deriving from an analgesic-exposed F1 parent also exhibited sex-specific changes. F2 males exhibited normal reproductive development whereas F2 females had smaller ovaries and reduced follicle numbers during puberty/adulthood; as similar changes were found for F2 offspring of analgesic-exposed F1 fathers or mothers, we interpret this as potentially indicating an analgesic-induced change to GC in F1. Assuming our results are translatable to humans, they raise concerns that analgesic use in pregnancy could potentially affect fertility of resulting daughters and grand-daughters.