No abstract

No abstract

ObjectiveAccess to healthcare is an important part of the (re)settlement process for Syrian refugees in Canada. There is growing concern about the healthcare needs of the 54,560 Syrian refugees who were admitted to Canada by May 2018, 80% of whom are women and children. We explored the healthcare needs of newcomer Syrian women, their experiences in accessing and using health services, and the factors and conditions that shape whether and how they access and utilize health services in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA).MethodThis community-based qualitative descriptive interpretive study was informed by Yang & Hwang (2016) health service utilization framework. Focus group discussions were held with 58 Syrian newcomer women in the GTA. These discussions were conducted in Arabic, audio-recorded with participants’ consent, translated into English and transcribed, and analyzed using thematic analysis.ResultsParticipants’ health concerns included chronic, long-term conditions as well as new and emerging issues. Initial health insurance and coverage were enabling factors to access to services, while language and social disconnection were barriers. Other factors, such as beliefs about naturopathic medicine, settlement in suburban areas with limited public transportation, and lack of linguistically, culturally, and gender-appropriate services negatively affected access to and use of healthcare services.ConclusionResponding to the healthcare needs of Syrian newcomer women in a timely and comprehensive manner requires coordinated, multi-sector initiatives that can address the financial, social, and structural barriers to their access and use of services.

ObjectivesImmigrants are thought to be healthier than their native-born counterparts, but less is known about the health of refugees or forced migrants. Previous studies often equate refugee status with immigration status or country of birth (COB) and none have compared refugee to non-refugee immigrants from the same COB. Herein, we examined whether: (1) a refugee mother experiences greater odds of adverse maternal and perinatal health outcomes compared with a similar non-refugee mother from the same COB and (2) refugee and non-refugee immigrants differ from Canadian-born mothers for maternal and perinatal outcomes.DesignThis is a retrospective population-based database study. We implemented two cohort designs: (1) 1:1 matching of refugees to non-refugee immigrants on COB, year and age at arrival (±5 years) and (2) an unmatched design using all data.Setting and participantsRefugee immigrant mothers (n=34 233), non-refugee immigrant mothers (n=243 439) and Canadian-born mothers (n=615 394) eligible for universal healthcare insurance who had a hospital birth in Ontario, Canada, between 2002 and 2014.Primary outcomesNumerous adverse maternal and perinatal health outcomes.ResultsRefugees differed from non-refugee immigrants most notably for HIV, with respective rates of 0.39% and 0.20% and an adjusted OR (AOR) of 1.82 (95% CI 1.19 to 2.79). Other elevated outcomes included caesarean section (AOR 1.04, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.08) and moderate preterm birth (AOR 1.08, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.17). For the majority of outcomes, refugee and non-refugee immigrants experienced similar AORs when compared with Canadian-born mothers.ConclusionsRefugee status was associated with a few adverse maternal and perinatal health outcomes, but the associations were not strong except for HIV. The definition of refugee status used herein may not sensitively identify refugees at highest risk. Future research would benefit from further refining refugee status based on migration experiences.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

, most refugees to Canada, including those who arrive seeking asylum, had major cuts to health insurance coverage provided by the Interim Federal Health Program. Coverage for many is now limited to conditions deemed a public health or public security concern. At the eleventh hour, following unprecedented activism by health care providers, editorials from national newspapers and letters from medical associations, refugees sponsored by the government and certain privately sponsored refugees were excluded from the cutbacks. In the succeeding 2 months, confusion has reigned among refugees and providers, with eligible refugees requiring urgent care being turned away from emergency departments while the government partially reverses course.