Reducing health inequalities through general practice

Series: Public engagement with research. Part 2: GPs and primary care researchers working inclusively with minoritised communities in health research to help address inequalities

Public engagement in health research is vital for addressing health disparities and promoting inclusivity among minoritised communities who often face barriers to accessing healthcare. Minoritised communities are groups, which have been made minorities by a dominant culture, race, ethnic group and/or social class and may experience health inequalities as a result. By incorporating diverse perspectives and lived experiences of minoritised communities, this approach aims to achieve contextually relevant research outcomes that reduce health inequalities and improve overall well-being. However, underrepresentation and lack of inclusivity challenges persist, necessitating the establishment of inclusive partnerships and grassroots participatory methodologies.

To foster inclusive public engagement, it is important to overcome structural and cultural barriers, address socioeconomic challenges, and build trust with minoritised communities. This can be achieved by promoting a cultural shift that values inclusivity, providing comprehensive training to researchers, and collecting rigorous data on engagement demographics for transparency and accountability. Involving minoritised communities in decision-making through participatory research approaches enhances trust and yields successful outcomes. Additionally, allocating sufficient resources, collaborating in co-production, and prioritising the diverse needs and perspectives of stakeholders contribute to fostering inclusive public engagement in research.

Overall, inclusive engagement practices particularly in primary care research have the potential to reduce health inequalities and cater to the unique requirements of minoritised communities, thereby creating more impactful outcomes and promoting equitable healthcare access.

Understanding the causes of missingness in primary care: a realist review

BACKGROUND

Although missed appointments in healthcare have been an area of concern for policy, practice and research, the primary focus has been on reducing single 'situational' missed appointments to the benefit of services. Little attention has been paid to the causes and consequences of more 'enduring' multiple missed appointments in primary care and the role this has in producing health inequalities.

METHODS

We conducted a realist review of the literature on multiple missed appointments to identify the causes of 'missingness.' We searched multiple databases, carried out iterative citation-tracking on key papers on the topic of missed appointments and identified papers through searches of grey literature. We synthesised evidence from 197 papers, drawing on the theoretical frameworks of candidacy and fundamental causation.

RESULTS

Missingness is caused by an overlapping set of complex factors, including patients not identifying a need for an appointment or feeling it is 'for them'; appointments as sites of poor communication, power imbalance and relational threat; patients being exposed to competing demands, priorities and urgencies; issues of travel and mobility; and an absence of choice or flexibility in when, where and with whom appointments take place.

CONCLUSIONS

Interventions to address missingness at policy and practice levels should be theoretically informed, tailored to patients experiencing missingness and their identified needs and barriers; be cognisant of causal domains at multiple levels and address as many as practical; and be designed to increase safety for those seeking care.

Care-seeking strategies of migrants during the transition from a specific primary healthcare facility for uncovered individuals to common ambulatory general practice: A French qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Migrants have complex health needs but face multiple barriers to accessing health care. In France, permanent healthcare access offices (PASSs), as specific primary health care facilities (SPHCs), provide care to people without health insurance coverage. Once these patients obtain health insurance, they are referred to common ambulatory general practice. The aim of this study was to explore migrants' experiences and strategies for seeking common primary care after having been treated by an SPHC.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative study based on grounded theory between January and April 2022. We held semi-structured interviews with migrants who had consulted a PASS. Two researchers performed an inductive analysis.

RESULTS

We interviewed 12 migrants aged 22 to 65 to confirm data saturation. The interviewees relied on "referents": professional referents (to be properly treated for specific health problems), guides (to find their way through the healthcare system), or practical referents (to address practical issues such as translation, travel needs, or medical matters). Those who considered the PASS to be a referent expressed disappointment and incomprehension at the time of discharge. Referral procedures and the first encounter with common ambulatory general practice were decisive in whether the interviewees accessed and stayed in a coordinated primary care pathway. The perceived quality of care depended on a feeling of being considered and listened to. For interviewees who received first-time services from an ambulatory general practice, the way in which they were referred to and their first experience with an ambulatory GP could influence their adherence to care.

CONCLUSIONS

The conditions of transition from SPHCs to common ambulatory general practice can impact migrants' adherence to a coordinated primary care pathway. Referral can improve these patients' care pathways and ease the transition from a PASS to ambulatory care. Healthcare professionals at SPHCs should pay special attention to vulnerable migrants without previous experience in ambulatory general practice and who depend on referents in their care pathways. For these patients, adapted referral protocols with further individual support and empowerment should be considered.

Access to primary care for children and young people (CYP) in the UK: a scoping review of CYP's, caregivers' and healthcare professionals' views and experiences of facilitators and barriers

OBJECTIVES

To examine children and young people's (CYP), caregivers' and healthcare professionals' (HCPs) views or experiences of facilitators and barriers to CYP access to UK primary care services to better understand healthcare inequity. To explore differences across CYP subpopulations with greater health needs from deprived areas, identifying as ethnic minorities, with experiences of state care, special educational needs or disabilities, chronic conditions or mental health problems.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Included studies were in English, published 2012-2022 and reported: the views/experiences of CYP (0-25 years), caregivers or HCPs about accessing UK primary care; using quantitative or qualitative empirical methods.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, PsycINFO and Scopus.

RESULTS

We included 47 reports (46 studies). CYP/caregivers' decision to access care was facilitated by CYP/caregivers' or their family/friends' ability to identify a health issue as warranting healthcare attention. Barriers to accessing care included perceived stigma (eg, being seen as a bad parent), embarrassment and discrimination experiences. CYP and caregivers believed longer opening hours could facilitate more timely access to care. Caregivers and HCPs reported that delayed or rejected referrals to secondary or adult care were a barrier to having needs met, especially for CYP with poor mental health. CYP and caregivers in numerous studies emphasised the importance of communication and trust with HCPs, including taking their concerns seriously, being knowledgeable and providing continuity of care for CYP. Common barriers reported across high-need subpopulations were caregivers needing knowledge and confidence to advocate for their child, gaps in HCP's knowledge and a lack of connectedness between primary and secondary care.

CONCLUSIONS

Connecting general practices and community health workers/services, improving CYP/caregivers' understanding of common childhood conditions, addressing HCP's knowledge gaps in paediatric care and integrated approaches between primary and secondary care may reduce inequity in access.

Patient and caregiver characteristics associated with differential use of primary care for children and young people in the UK: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

To systematically map evidence to answer the research question: What is the relationship between the characteristics of children and young people (CYP) or their caregivers and primary care service use in the UK, taking into account underlying healthcare needs? DESIGN: Scoping review.

SETTING

Primary care.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

English-language quantitative or mixed-methods studies published between 2012 and 2022.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science Social Sciences Citation Index, and grey literature.

RESULTS

22 eligible studies were identified, covering general practice (n=14), dental health (n=4), child mental health (MN) services (n=3) and immunisation (n=1). Only eight studies (36%) controlled for variables associated with healthcare need (eg, age, birth weight and long-term conditions). In these, evidence of horizontal inequity in primary care use was reported for CYP living in deprived areas in England, with and without complex needs. Horizontal inequity was also identified in primary care MN referrals for CYP in England identifying as mixed-race, Asian or black ethnicity, compared with their white British peers. No evidence of horizontal inequity was observed, however, in primary care use for CYP in England exposed to parental depression, or for CYP children from low-income households in Scotland. Increasing CYP's age was associated with decreasing primary care use across included studies. No studies were found regarding CYP from Gypsy or Traveller communities, children in care, or those with disabilities or special educational needs.

CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence that socioeconomic factors impact on CYP's primary care use, in particular age, ethnicity and deprivation. However, better quality evidence is required to evaluate horizontal inequity in use and address knowledge gaps regarding primary care use for vulnerable CYP populations and the impact of policy and practice related 'supply side' of primary care.

International Migration and Cardiovascular Health: Unraveling the Disease Burden Among Migrants to North America and Europe

Europe and North America are the 2 largest recipients of international migrants from low-resource regions in the world. Here, large differences in cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and death exist between migrants and the host populations. This review discusses the CVD burden and its most important contributors among the largest migrant groups in Europe and North America as well as the consequences of migration to high-income countries on CVD diagnosis and therapy. The available evidence indicates that migrants in Europe and North America generally have a higher CVD risk compared with the host populations. Cardiometabolic, behavioral, and psychosocial factors are important contributors to their increased CVD risk. However, despite these common denominators, there are important ethnic differences in the propensity to develop CVD that relate to pre- and postmigration factors, such as socioeconomic status, cultural factors, lifestyle, psychosocial stress, access to health care and health care usage. Some of these pre- and postmigration environmental factors may interact with genetic (epigenetics) and microbial factors, which further influence their CVD risk. The limited number of prospective cohorts and clinical trials in migrant populations remains an important culprit for better understanding pathophysiological mechanism driving health differences and for developing ethnic-specific CVD risk prediction and care. Only by improved understanding of the complex interaction among human biology, migration-related factors, and sociocultural determinants of health influencing CVD risk will we be able to mitigate these differences and truly make inclusive personalized treatment possible.

Evaluating engagement with equity in Canadian provincial and territorial primary care policies: Results of a jurisdictional scan

Equitable access to primary care is essential to achieving more equitable health outcomes, yet evidence suggests that structurally marginalized populations are less likely to have benefited from varied primary care reforms in Canada. Our objective is to determine how equity is incorporated in public primary care policy and strategy documents across Canada. We conducted string term and snowball searches for provincial/territorial primary care policy documents published between 01 January 2018 and 30 June 2022, extracted the policy objective, and applied a rubric to evaluate each document's engagement with equity. We performed content analysis of the documents which acknowledged inequities and articulated a related policy response. Of the 224 identified documents that discussed primary care policy: 63 (28 %) identified one or more structurally marginalized group(s) experiencing inequities related to primary care, 64 (29 %) identified a structurally marginalized group and articulated a policy response, and 16 (7 %) articulated a detailed policy response to address inequities. Even where policy responses were articulated, in most cases these did not directly address the acknowledged inequities. The absence of measurable goals, meaningful community consultation, and tenuous connections between the policy response and inequities mentioned may help explain persistent inequities in primary care across Canada.

A rapid review of opportunities and challenges in the implementation of social prescription interventions for addressing the unmet needs of individuals living with long-term chronic conditions

BACKGROUND

People with long-term chronic conditions often struggle to access and navigate complex health and social services. Social prescription (SP) interventions, a patient-centred approach, help individuals identify their holistic needs and increase access to non-clinical resources, thus leading to improved health and well-being. This review explores existing SP interventions for people with long-term chronic conditions and identifies the opportunities and challenges of implementing them in primary healthcare settings.

METHODS

This rapid review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis guidelines and searched relevant articles in three databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science) by using subject headings and keywords combined with Boolean operators. The search encompassed articles published between January 2010 and June 2023. Two authors independently conducted study screening and data abstraction using predefined criteria. A descriptive synthesis process using content analysis was performed to summarise the literature.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies were included, with all but one conducted in the United Kingdom, and revealed that social prescribers help guide patients with long-term chronic conditions to various local initiatives related to health and social needs. Effective implementation of SP interventions relies on building strong relationships between social prescribers and patients, characterised by trust, empathy, and effective communication. A holistic approach to addressing the unmet needs of people with long-term chronic conditions, digital technology utilisation, competent social prescribers, collaborative healthcare partnerships, clinical leadership, and access to local resources are all vital components of successful SP intervention. However, the implementation of SP interventions faces numerous challenges, including accessibility and utilisation barriers, communication gaps, staffing issues, an unsupportive work environment, inadequate training, lack of awareness, time management struggles, coordination and collaboration difficulties, and resource constraints.

CONCLUSION

The present review emphasises the importance of addressing the holistic needs of people with long-term chronic conditions through collaboration and coordination, training of social prescribers, community connections, availability of local resources, and primary care leadership to ensure successful interventions, ultimately leading to improved patient health and well-being outcomes. This study calls for the need to develop or utilise appropriate tools that can capture people's holistic needs, as well as an implementation framework to guide future contextual SP interventions.