Healthcare interventions for low-wage migrant workers: A systematic review
Rast, E.; Lau, K.; Lin, R. C.-Y.; Loganathan, T.; Hargreaves, S.; Zimmerman, C.; on behalf of the Consortium for Migrant Worker Health,
Show abstract
Low-wage labour migrants often face health-damaging living and working conditions, but are frequently excluded from healthcare. The othering of migrants, bordering of healthcare and simple oversight and negligence create widening health inequalities for a societys essential workers. This review aimed to identify the forms and effectiveness of healthcare interventions designed to make services accessible for migrant workers . We searched for literature through Medline, Embase, Global Health, Web of Science, and Global Index Medicus (from 1 January 2000 till 9 June 2023), focussing on some of the most common sectors for forced labour (domestic work, construction, manufacturing, agriculture, mining). Primary research, reports, and grey literature from 2000 onwards containing descriptions or evaluations of healthcare interventions exclusively targeting low-wage migrant workers and their families were included. We excluded interventions focussing only on specific health conditions or disease screening. Quality appraisal was based on JBI tools. We produced a narrative synthesis separately for the interventions characteristics and effects. This review follows the PRISMA reporting guidelines for systematic reviews and is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023459360). Identified studies included 21 interventions targeting low-wage migrant workers in six countries (China, Dominican Republic, Italy, Qatar, South Africa, USA) in three sectors (agriculture, manufacturing, domestic work). Interventions included established medical facilities (e.g., general hospital care, semi-permanent primary healthcare (PHC) services); mobile clinics for PHC; and telehealth services. Interventions were provided by governmental, non-governmental, academic, and private actors. Most targeted migrant farmworkers and were primarily located in the United States. Common healthcare barriers were addressed, for example, via free care, outreach, or non-traditional hours. However, the interventions effects on health, access and uptake, patient satisfaction, and acceptability were largely unclear, as only six studies offered some fragmentary evaluative evidence. Few healthcare interventions targeting migrant workers have been documented and evaluated, especially in LMICs. Although migrant workers are deemed to be mobile populations, once in the destination location, many are quite immobile when it comes to accessing healthcare. Thus, in the face of multidimensional exclusion of migrant workers, health systems cannot simply rely on the ability of this vital workforce to seek and use preventative or curative care, but healthcare services must be actively designed to be accessible to this mobile population in order to ensure health as a human right. Highlights- What is already known on this topic: Many migrant workers are exposed to occupational health risks and substandard living-conditions. Due to the intersection of socioeconomic disadvantage and migrant status as well as bordering of healthcare and other services, low-wage labour migrants often face multi-dimensional exclusion from health systems. To inform policy, practice and research, we systematically reviewed evidence on targeted healthcare interventions globally for migrant workers. - What this study adds: This review identified healthcare interventions for migrant workers, including: established clinics (e.g., general hospital, p healthcare centres); mobile clinics (delivering primary healthcare); and telehealth services (for chronic disease management and mental health. Common tactics to overcome exclusion from healthcare were applied via e.g., outreach, free care or language mediation. Most included interventions targeted agricultural workers. - How this study might affect research, practice or policy: Findings offer several examples of approaches designed to surpass borders to healthcare commonly faced by low-wage migrant workers with prevention and treatment interventions. To improve health equity for migrant workers, budget-holders need to invest in diverse interventions that are specifically designed to reach migrant workers vs waiting for migrant workers to navigate their general exclusion from the healthcare system. Because labour migration and hazardous labour conditions are especially prevalent in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), there is an urgent and substantial need to assess migrant workers health needs and access options to develop and test targeted health interventions specifically designed to reach migrant workers.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Examining National Health Insurance Fund Members’ preferences and trade-offs for the attributes of contracted outpatient facilities in Kenya: a discrete choice experiment 94%
- Demographic and professional risk factors of COVID-19 infections among physicians in low- and middle-income settings; findings from a representative survey in two Brazilian states 94%
- Mentorship in Health Research Institutions in Africa: A Systematic Review of Approaches, Benefits, Successes, Gaps and Challenges 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- How to attract and retain health workers in rural areas of a fragile state: findings from a labour market survey in Guinea 94%
- Artificial Intelligence for Contextual Well-being: Protocol for an Exploratory Sequential Mixed Methods Study with Medical Students as a Social Microcosm 93%
- The impact of COVID-19 non-pharmaceutical interventions on the lived experiences of people living in Thailand, Malaysia, Italy and the United Kingdom: a cross-country qualitative study 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Migrant healthcare workers during COVID-19: bringing an intersectional health system-related approach into pandemic protection. A German case study 96%
- Healthcare workers’ perceptions and medically approved COVID-19 infection risk: understanding the mental health dimension of the pandemic. A German hospital case study 93%
- Cross-sector Decision Landscape in Response to COVID-19: A Qualitative Analysis of North Carolina Decision-Makers 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Implementation Science Protocol for a participatory, theory-informed implementation research programme in the context of health system strengthening in sub-Saharan Africa (ASSET-ImplementER) 94%
- Psychological, social and financial impact of COVID-19 on culturally and linguistically diverse communities: a cross-sectional Australian study 94%
- A decade of Acceptability Research with Adolescents in Africa: Systematic review and evidence map 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Delays in accessing high-quality care for newborns in East Africa: An analysis of survey data in Malawi, Mozambique, and Tanzania 91%
- Enabling Health Outcomes of Nature-based Interventions: A Systematic Scoping Review 91%
- Workplace Violence and Self-Reported Physical and Mental Health: A National Cross-Sectional Study in Lebanon 90%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.