International mobility has increased steadily in recent times, bringing along a myriad of health, social and health system challenges to migrants themselves and the host nations. Mental health issues have been identified as a significant problem among migrants, with poor accessibility and underutilisation of the available mental health services (MHSs) repeatedly reported, including in Australia. Using a qualitative inquiry and one-on-one in-depth interviews, this study explored perspectives of African migrants and service providers on barriers to accessing MHSs among African migrants in South Australia. The data collection took place during the COVID-19 pandemic with lockdown and other measures to combat the pandemic restricting face to face meetings with potential participants. Online platforms including Zoom and/or WhatsApp video calls were used to interview 20 African migrants and 10 service providers. Participants were recruited from community groups and/or associations, and organisations providing services for migrants and/or refugees in South Australia using the snowball sampling technique. Thematic framework analysis was used to guide the data analysis. Key themes centred on personal factors (health literacy including knowledge and the understanding of the health system, and poor financial condition), structural factors related to difficulties in navigating the complexity of the health system and a lack of culturally aware service provision, sociocultural and religious factors, mental health stigma and discrimination. The findings provide an insight into the experiences of African migrants of service provision to them and offer suggestions on how to improve these migrants’ mental health outcomes in Australia. Overcoming barriers to accessing mental health services would need a wide range of strategies including education on mental health, recognising variations in cultures for effective service provision, and addressing mental health stigma and discrimination which strongly deter service access by these migrants. These strategies will facilitate help-seeking behaviours as well as effective provision of culturally safe MHSs and improvement in access to MHSs among African migrants.

Background Several reviews have found that psychological trauma affects access to health care services, including mental health care, in the general population. People from refugee and asylum seeker backgrounds are more likely to have a mental illness than the general population, and experience a broad range of barriers and facilitators to service access. However, to date there has been no comprehensive consideration of the potential effect of psychological trauma on access to primary health care within this population. Methods This paper provides a mixed-methods systematic review of literature which included any consideration of the relationship between psychological trauma and access to primary health care. A systematic search of Medline, PsychInfo, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL and Cochrane Library was conducted. Study eligibility criteria were empirical, peer-reviewed studies that considered the relationship between psychological trauma and access to, or use of, primary healthcare in resettlement countries for refugees (including asylum seekers). Papers were required to be written in English and published between 1998 and August 2019. Quality was assessed using the Multi-Methods Appraisal Tool. The search identified a total of 14 eligible studies (11 quantitative and 3 qualitative) which had explored this relationship in refugee and asylum seeker populations. Results Overall, synthesis of findings indicated variable results with respect to the impact of psychological trauma on service access. Specifically, the review found that while rates of psychological trauma were high. Key themes were that while general health care access was comparable or greater than the general population, rates of mental healthcare specifically were low. In addition, included papers identified a range of barriers to service access—particularly somatisation, stigma and healthcare provide knowledge about psychological trauma. Conclusions While there is a critical need for more research in this area, the study points to several key recommendations including training of general practitioners in relation to psychological trauma, ensuring culturally responsive services, and the use of interpreters. Finally, due to the levels of somatisation found in some studies, ensuring general practitioners understand the somatic element of psychological trauma—particularly within some groups of people from refugee backgrounds—is important.

No abstract