Rejecting and accepting international migrant patients into primary care practices: a mixed method study

Author:

Mota Lorena,Mayhew Maureen,Grant Karen J.,Batista Ricardo,Pottie Kevin

Abstract

Purpose – International migrants frequently struggle to obtain access to local primary care practices. The purpose of this paper is to explore factors associated with rejecting and accepting migrant patients into Canadian primary care practices. Design/methodology/approach – Mixed methods study. Using a modified Delphi consensus approach among a network of experts on migrant health, the authors identified and prioritized factors related to rejecting and accepting migrants into primary care practices. From ten semi-structured interviews with the less-migrant-care experienced practitioners, the authors used qualitative description to further examine nuances of these factors. Findings – Consensus was reached on practitioner-level factors associated with a reluctance of practitioners to accept migrants − communication challenges, high-hassle factor, limited availability of clinicians, fear of financial loss, lack of awareness of migrant groups, and limited migrant health knowledge – and on factors associated with accepting migrants − feeling useful, migrant health education, third party support, learning about other cultures, experience working overseas, and enjoying the challenge of treating diseases from around the world. Interviews supported use of interpreters, community resources, alternative payment methods, and migrant health education as strategies to overcome the identified challenges. Research limitations/implications – This Delphi network represented the views of practitioners who had substantive experience in providing care for migrants. Interviews with less-experienced practitioners were used to mitigate this bias. Originality/value – This study identifies the facilitators and challenges of migrants’ access to primary care from the perspective of primary care practitioners, work that complements research from patients’ perspectives. Strategies to address these findings are discussed.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Law,Sociology and Political Science,Health(social science)

Cited by 5 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3