No abstract

Background With the aim of decreasing immigration, the British government extended charging for healthcare in England for certain migrants in 2017. There is concern these policies amplify the barriers to healthcare already faced by asylum seekers and refugees (ASRs). Awareness has been shown to be fundamental to access. This article jointly explores (i) health care professionals’ (HCPs) awareness of migrants’ eligibility for healthcare, and (ii) ASRs’ awareness of health services. Methods Mixed methods were used. Quantitative survey data explored HCPs’ awareness of migrants’ eligibility to healthcare after the extension of charging regulations. Qualitative data from semi-structured interviews with ASRs were analyzed thematically using Saurman’s domains of awareness as a framework. Results In total 514 HCPs responded to the survey. Significant gaps in HCPs’ awareness of definitions, entitlements and charging regulations were identified. 80% of HCP respondents were not confident defining the immigration categories upon which eligibility for care rests. Only a small minority (6%) reported both awareness and understanding of the charging regulations. In parallel, the 18 ASRs interviewed had poor awareness of their eligibility for free National Health Service care and suitability for particular services. This was compounded by language difficulties, social isolation, frequent asylum dispersal accommodation moves, and poverty. Conclusion This study identifies significant confusion amongst both HCP and ASR concerning eligibility and healthcare access. The consequent negative impact on health is concerning given the contemporary political climate, where eligibility for healthcare depends on immigration status.

No abstract

No abstract

Background HIV-2 is rare in the UK. Many UK centres therefore only treat small numbers of people and there are few clinical trials to guide treatment. The British HIV Association (BHIVA) 2010 guidelines for management of HIV-2 formed the basis for this national audit, which aims to describe current practice and adherence to guidelines. Methods All UK centres providing HIV care were contacted via the BHIVA “Members Matters” newsletter, and asked to submit anonymised, retrospective data for individuals living with HIV-2 accessing care at their service. Results Thirty-five sites responded and data were analysed for 167 individuals. Nearly half of individuals accessed care at one of four large London centres (77/167, 46%). Most people living with HIV-2 have taken antiretroviral therapy (ART) (132/167, 79%). The most common reasons for initiating treatment were clinical disease (34/89, 38%) and pregnancy (11/89, 12%). Most treatment-naïve individuals were initiated on a protease inhibitor based regimen (70/89, 79%). The use of integrase strand transfer inhibitor based regimens has increased over time. A significant minority of patients did not have baseline drug resistance testing performed, despite having a detectable viral load (15/52, 29%). Virological failure occurred in a minority of individuals (21/132, 16%); the most common drug regimen change in this context was the addition of an integrase strand transfer inhibitor (12/26 regimen changes, 46%). Conclusions Most individuals living with HIV-2 were managed according to national guidance, with key areas for improvement including the choice of ART, drug resistance testing and the management of virological failure. It is hoped that this national audit, performed in conjunction with the updated 2021 BHIVA guidelines will improve the care of individuals living with HIV-2 in the UK.