Coproduction of healthcare service with immigrant patients: protocol of a scoping review

Abstract

IntroductionImmigrant patients often meet barriers to patient-centred healthcare in their new host countries. Given the heterogeneity of patients from ethnic minorities, established strategies for patient centredness might not work in their case. The concept of coproduction provides a new perspective on how to collaboratively create the highest possible value for both the patient and the healthcare system. The concept acknowledges that all service is coproduced and directs attention to the relationship between patient and care provider. Coproduction is still a new concept in healthcare and its use with vulnerable groups of patients requires further study. This protocol outlines a scoping review to be conducted on the current knowledge on coproduction of service by immigrants and their service providers in the healthcare sector.Methods and analysisWe will use Joanna Briggs methodology for scoping reviews. The data will stem from the following databases: PubMed, Scopus, Ovid EMBASE, EBSCO CINAHL, EBSCO PsycINFO, Cochrane Library and Web of Science. We will also screen the websites of national authorities and research organisations for publications and review the literature lists of the identified articles for relevant references. We will include all types of literature on coproduction of healthcare or social service by immigrants and service providers, including their relationship with one another, communication and collaboration. Two reviewers will independently screen eligible publications and extract data using a checklist developed for this scoping review.Ethics and disseminationThe results of the study will provide an innovative perspective on the coproduction of value in healthcare service by immigrant patients and care providers. We will present the results at national and international conferences, seminars and other events with relevant stakeholders and immigrant patients, and publish them in a peer-reviewed journal.

A Clinical-Psychological Perspective on Somatization Among Immigrants: A Systematic Review

“…Seven studies (Aragona et al, 2005, 2008, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013; Deisenhammer et al, 2012) assessed somatization using the Bradford Somatic Inventory (BSI-21) (Mumford et al, 1991), a widely validated self-assessment questionnaire specifically designed for transcultural research and formerly used to assess somatization among groups of primary care immigrants. The Patient Health Questionnaire-15 (PHQ-15) (Dreher et al, 2017; Mendoza et al, 2017; Morawa et al, 2017) and the Hopkins Symptom Checklist-37 (HSCL-37) (Breuer and Freud, 1893–1895; Alexander, 1950; Derogatis, 1977; Mai and Merkey, 1980; Barsky and Klerman, 1983; Bridges and Goldberg, 1987; Lipowski, 1988; Escobar et al, 1989; Mumford et al, 1991; American Psychiatric Association, 1994, 2013; Castillo et al, 1995; Escobar, 1995; Gureje et al, 1997; Kirmayer and Young, 1998; Silove et al, 1998; Simon et al, 1999; Mak and Zane, 2004; Aragona et al, 2005, 2008, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013; Nickel et al, 2006; Kirmayer and Sartorius, 2007; Cwikel et al, 2008; Jackson and Kroenke, 2008; Sachs et al, 2008; Liberati et al, 2009; Bermejo et al, 2010; Beirens and Fontaine, 2011; Perruchoud and Redpath-Cross, 2011; Schweitzer et al, 2011; Shiroma and Alarcon, 2011; David et al, 2012; Deisenhammer et al, 2012; Heredia Montesinos et al, 2012; Stewart et al, 2012; Van Wyk et al, 2012; Bragazzi et al, 2014; Mölsä et al, 2014, 2017; Rohlof et al, 2014; Haller et al, 2015; Rask et al, 2015, 2016; Spiller et al, 2016; Choi et al, 2017; Dreher et al, 2017; Mendoza et al, 2017; Morawa et al, 2017; Radl-Karimi et al, 2018) were each used in three records. The PHQ-15 consists of four subscales: Somatoform Disorder, Depressive Disorder, Panic Disorder, and Functioning of the...…”

“…In addition, as patients and health care professionals face differences in cultural backgrounds (e.g., linguistic barriers, variant health/illness beliefs, different medical practices, lack of knowledge about health care systems), understanding and treating somatization in multicultural settings is particularly challenging (Perron and Hudelson, 2006; Bäärnhielm, 2012; Dastjerdi, 2012). Based on the available literature, there is a clear need for better access to healthcare services for immigrants that is both culturally and linguistically appropriate and, as well, affordable for low-income individuals (Radl-Karimi et al, 2018). Clinically, depending on the country of origin, health care professionals should be aware of the immigrant patients' tendency to somatize psychological distress and of their ascriptions of meaning of symptoms within a multicultural milieu.…”

“…Somatization is a psychological dimension common to all people; it manifests in response to psychosocial stress brought about by life events and situations that are personally stressful to the individual (Lipowski, 1988). It has been strongly associated with the migrant status itself, as a coping or adapting mechanism extremely disadvantageous for health (Castillo et al, 1995; Escobar, 1995; Kirmayer and Sartorius, 2007; Radl-Karimi et al, 2018).…”

Evaluating Patient-Centered Mobile Health Technologies: Definitions, Methodologies, and Outcomes

“…Patients likely experience physical or emotional impairments such as fears, grief, and anxiety while using the service [86]. All of these factors likely suggest that a particular patient's informational and decision-making needs are different from those that they would have outside of a health care context [86][87][88][89]. Patient participation and active engagement are the classic tenets of task, user, representation, and functional analysis used to inform system designers and leadership that are contemplating implementing solutions to patient-centered problems [87][88][89].…”

Coproduction with peer support groups: A new approach to culturally responsive social services

“…The coproduction of social services has the potential to lead to culturally responsive service provision (Radl‐Karimi et al, 2020). Coproduction in social services refers to collaborations between service users and providers to improve service quality and form a relationship that is beneficial to both parties (Radl‐Karimi et al, 2018, 2022). The utility of coproduction for cultural responsiveness in service provision has been empirically confirmed in a wide range of social service contexts (Allen et al, 2013; Fang & Fisher, 2019; Fang et al, 2021; van Herwaarden et al, 2021; Radl‐Karimi et al, 2020).…”