"Whatever you hide, also hides you": A discourse analysis on mental health and service use in an American community of Somalis

Review of Muslim Patient Needs and Its Implications on Healthcare Delivery

BACKGROUND

In the rapidly changing environment of healthcare, striving toward health equity and providing patient-centered care is imperative to the patient's experience. To achieve these goals, a comprehensive understanding of the diverse patient populations seeking these services, their needs, and the multitude of religious, cultural, and structural elements that impact their well-being is required. Muslim patients represent a considerable demographic, both in number and complexity of religious and cultural beliefs and practices. This scoping review examines the intersection of religion and cultural values with healthcare delivery in the context of the Muslim patient experience.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review is to identify key concepts and challenges that impact the Muslim patient experience.

SEARCH METHODS

The research databases Cochrane Library, OVID Medline, and PubMED were used to conduct a comprehensive systemic review of original, empirical peer-reviewed publications with the following search terms: "Muslim healthcare," "Muslim patient," and "Muslim experience."

SELECTION CRITERIA

Inclusion and exclusion criteria were used to narrow down articles to those that addressed Muslim patient needs and their healthcare experience.

RESULTS

A total of 21 articles met the criteria of this scoping review. Five central topics were identified during thematic analysis: Ramadan and Fasting, Barriers in the Patient-Physician Relationship, Trauma and Perceived Discrimination, Mental Health Awareness and Stigma, and Awareness of Advanced Care Planning.

CONCLUSION

This scoping review demonstrates that in order to provide patient-centered care addressing the unique needs of Muslim patients, religious and cultural values need to be explored under the frameworks of cultural humility and structural competency.

Towards a better understanding between non-Muslim primary care clinicians and Muslim patients: A literature review intended to reduce health care inequities in Muslim patients

Although Muslims are a growing population within many non-Muslim countries, there are insufficient Muslim clinicians to care for them. Studies have shown that non-Muslim clinicians have limited knowledge and understanding of Islamic practices affecting health, which may lead to disparities in the quality of healthcare delivery and outcomes when caring for Muslim patients. Muslims come from many different cultures and ethnicities and have variations in their beliefs and practices. This literature review provides some insights which may strengthen therapeutic bonds between non-Muslim clinicians and their Muslim patients resulting in improved holistic, patient-centered care in the areas of cancer screening, mental health, nutrition, and pharmacotherapy. Additionally, this review informs clinicians about the Islamic perspective on childbirth, end of life issues, travel for Islamic pilgrimage, and fasting during the month of Ramadan. Literature was sourced by a comprehensive search in PubMed, Scopus, and CINAHL along with hand screening of citations. Title and abstract screening followed by full-text screening excluded studies including less than 30% Muslim participants, protocols, or reporting results deemed irrelevant to primary care. 115 papers were selected for inclusion in the literature review. These were grouped into the themes of general spirituality, which were discussed in the Introduction, and Islam and health, Social etiquette, Cancer screening, Diet, Medications and their alternatives, Ramadan, Hajj, Mental health, Organ donation and transplants, and End of life. Summarizing the findings of the review, we conclude that health inequities affecting Muslim patients can be addressed at least in part by improved cultural competency in non-Muslim clinicians, as well as further research into this area.

Health outcomes and female genital mutilation/cutting: how much is due to the cutting itself?

While Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C) continues to garner global attention, FGM/C-affected migrant communities, who are often racialized minorities in the U.S., face additional challenges which may impact their physical and mental health and well-being. It has been proposed that an overly narrow focus on the female genitalia or FGM/C status alone, while ignoring the wider social experiences and perceptions of affected migrant women, will result in incomplete or misleading conclusions about the relationship between FGM/C and migrant women's health. A cross-sectional study was conducted across two waves of Somali and Somali Bantu women living in the United States, (n = 879 [wave 1], n = 654 [wave 2]). Socio-demographics, self-reported FGM/C status, perceived psychological distress, and self-reported FGM/C-related health morbidity was examined against self-reported experiences of everyday discrimination and perceived psychosocial support. In statistical models including age and educational attainment as potentially confounding socio-demographic variables, as well as self-reported FGM/C status, self-reported discrimination, and perceived psychosocial support, self-reported discrimination was the variable most strongly associated with poor physical health and psychological distress (i.e., FGM/C-related health morbidity and psychological distress), with greater perceived psychosocial support negatively associated with psychological distress, when controlling for all the other variables in the model. FGM/C status was not significantly associated with either outcome. Discrimination, more frequently reported among 'No FGM/C' (i.e., genitally intact or unmodified) women, was most frequently perceived as linked to religion and ethnicity. Our findings are consistent with views that discrimination drives negative outcomes. In this population, discrimination may include the 'quadruple jeopardy' of intersecting relationships among gender, race, religion, and migration status. We find that self-reported experiences of discrimination-and not FGM/C status per se-is associated with adverse physical and mental health consequences in our sample drawn from Somali migrant communities living in the United States, and that social support may help to mitigate these consequences. Our findings thus reinforce calls to better contextualize the relationship between FGM/C and measures of health and well-being among Somali women in the United States (regardless of their FGM/C status), taking psychosocial factors more centrally into account.Clinical Trials.Gov ID no. NCT03249649, Study ID no. 5252. Public website: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03249649.

Investigating Outcomes of a Family Strengthening Intervention for Resettled Somali Bantu and Bhutanese Refugees: An Explanatory Sequential Mixed Methods Study

Pre- and post-migration stressors can put resettled refugee children at risk of poor mental health outcomes. The Family Strengthening Intervention for Refugees (FSI-R) is a peer-delivered preventative home visiting program for resettled refugees that aims to draw upon families' strengths to foster improved family communication, positive parenting, and caregiver-child relationships, with the ultimate goal of reducing children's risk of mental health problems. Using an explanatory sequential mixed methods design, this study draws upon qualitative interviews with caregivers (n = 19) and children (n = 17) who participated in a pilot study of the FSI-R intervention in New England, as well as interventionists (n = 4), to unpack quantitative findings on mental health and family functioning from a randomized pilot study (n = 80 families). Most patterns observed in the quantitative data as published in the pilot trial were triangulated by qualitative data. Bhutanese caregivers and children noted that children were less shy or scared to speak up after participating in the FSI-R. Somali Bantu families spoke less about child mental health and underscored feasibility challenges like language barriers between caregivers and children. Interventionists suggested that families with higher levels of education were more open to implementing behavior change. In both groups, families appreciated the intervention and found it to be feasible and acceptable, but also desired additional help in addressing broader family and community needs such as jobs and literacy programs.