Refugees and asylum seekers may experience challenges related to pre-arrival experiences, structural disadvantage after migration and during resettlement requiring the need for special protection when participating in research. The aim was to review if and how people with refugee and asylum seeker backgrounds have had their need for special protection addressed in national and international research ethics guidelines. A systematic search of grey literature was undertaken. The search yielded 2187 documents of which fourteen met the inclusion criteria. Few guidelines addressed specific ethical considerations for vulnerable groups much less people with refugee and asylum seeker backgrounds. One guideline explicitly addressed vulnerability for refugees and asylums seekers. To ensure members of ethics committees and researchers consider the potential challenges of conducting research with these groups, guidelines may need to be supplemented with a refugee and asylum seeker specific research ethics framework. Such a framework may be necessary to optimally protect people with refugee and asylum seeker backgrounds in research.

The global refugee crisis has become an urgent, pressing humanitarian issue, with an estimated 37 million children forcibly displaced from their homes due to conflict, persecution, violence and other human rights violations by mid-2022. Of these children, only a small percentage are eligible for resettlement in a new country. This narrative review examines the physical health needs of resettled refugee children (RRC) in the United States. By analyzing nutrition and growth, infectious diseases, and general health care/screening measures, a set of comprehensive, evidence-based guidelines and public health perspectives are formulated to facilitate ongoing discussion to ensure that RRC receive equitable health care access. An urgent call to action emphasizes cross-border collaboration between governments, public health experts, refugee populations, and disease preparedness authorities in order to prioritize the physical health of RRC. This review will provide primary care providers, public health professionals, social service workers, and community advocates with up-to-date recommendations to meet the health needs of RRC in the U.S.

In the United States, clinicians are often called upon to provide their expertise to generate expert evidence in cases of individuals seeking asylum or other forms of international protection. Due to a lack of validated guidelines specific to the U.S. immigration context, clinical evaluations produced for immigration proceedings in the United States vary in their format, structure, and content, which can be confusing for practitioners and for adjudicators assessing the weight these evaluations should be afforded in asylum proceedings. We sought to review critical components of a medico-legal asylum evaluation from an interdisciplinary perspective of key stakeholders, by collecting and synthesizing expert opinions to reach consensus on what constitutes a high-quality, comprehensive medical or psychological affidavit for U.S. immigration cases. The consensus process incorporated a three-step modified Delphi method, which took place between September and December 2021 and consisted of two rounds of online questionnaires and a synchronous video conference meeting. The areas most experts agreed on included, by order of highest agreement (combining answers of \"strongly agree\" and \"agree\"): A narrative form or checklist is preferable to a predetermined template (95%); Primary care physicians should describe their qualifications to diagnose mental health conditions (81%); Use of citation is helpful, with caveats (77%); Clinicians should include an assessment of malingering (72%); Clinicians should include an executive summary/summary of conclusions at the top of the affidavit (72%); Clinicians should reference the Istanbul Protocol and explain its relevance (66%); It may be beneficial for clinicians to describe the anticipated process of healing (57%); Clinicians may include treatment recommendations (52%). Results of this and future consensus-building efforts and resulting guidance should be used to enhance overall quality of medico-legal reports and incorporated in training programs developed for clinicians, attorneys and adjudicators.

The number of torture survivors is on the rise, posing issues for their care in healthcare settings. Even healthcare experts with training in refugee care are unaware of the health difficulties faced by torture survivors. Any medical evaluation or treatment has the potential to re-traumatize torture survivors, thereby reactivating trauma symptoms without applicable guidelines to prevent re-traumatization.
Our objective was to identify, characterize, evaluate, and organize current, available evidence presenting existing recommendations and suggestions to prevent re-traumatization during the treatment of torture survivors\' physical diseases in healthcare services.
A comprehensive search of electronic databases was conducted. Gray literature coverage was obtained by searching for publications from relevant associations and healthcare organizations focusing on torture survivors. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and research focusing on somatic healthcare services for adult torture survivors, regardless of study design, were eligible for review. Studies that concentrated on psychiatric departments were excluded. To conduct an overview of the available research and describe the scope and distribution of evidence, a mapping review methodology was used.
Forty out of 13,111 initial citations met our criteria. There were two guidelines, and text and opinion statements predominated. Two authors independently assessed the risk of bias in each primary research study using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklist for the research design.
This mapping review identifies triggers that may re-traumatize torture survivors during treatment and makes recommendations for prevention. Only a few studies have considered torture survivors\' perspectives on treatment and re-traumatization. According to the findings of the mapping review, healthcare providers should consider survivors\' biopsychosocial situations, demonstrate cultural sensitivity, and change theirpersonal attitudes . They must also identify tortured patients and determine when professional interpreters should be used.

The U.S. military has a 50-year history of managing resettlement or refugee camps on bases. In July and August 2021, more than 124,000 persons were evacuated from Afghanistan, with 55,000 Afghans temporarily housed at U.S. military bases around the world during Operation Allies Welcome (OAW) at its peak.
PubMed was searched for papers published in English between January 1, 1980, and February 1, 2021, using \"Afghanistan\" and \"health\" (including \"public health,\" \"maternal health,\" and \"child health\"), \"maternal, newborn, and child health,\" and \"health situation\" as search terms and specific topics of interest. Where scholarly work was unavailable, reports of the United States Agency for International Development, implementing partners, gray literature, donor reports, Afghanistan Ministry of Health documents, national health plans, policies, and strategies, DoD after-action reviews (AARs), and guidance from previous refugee airlifts were also included in the search.
Although AARs may provide some helpful guidance for these refugee settings, a review of open-source AARs and had little to no health guidance, focused primarily on administrative issues, and do not follow humanitarian guidelines. DoD guidance for refugee settings is dated and requires updating to be useful. There is a well-developed body of literature of international standards, guidelines, and best practices for refugee settings. Using the standardized Needs Assessment for Refugee Emergencies checklist as a guide, this review provides a standardized refugee health assessment framework for ensuring the health and well-being of Afghan refugees on U.S. military bases is based on humanitarian response guidelines and best practices to ensure their care meets international standards. All groups, especially minority ethnic groups (e.g., Hazaras), sexual and gender minorities, elderly, disabled, or mentally ill persons, need equal access to protection to ensure they are not targeted. Water, sanitation, and hygiene must be gender-sensitive and inclusive which includes well-lit separate facilities for males and females to decrease vulnerability to violence. The displaced population must be involved in the management of the camp through community participation and representation. All providers in OAW should be briefed on the food security and nutrition context of those in their care. Medical providers are most effective if they have significant experience with the refugee population health context. Understanding refugee medicine, the ability to work with illiterate and uneducated populations and translators are important skills. Abiding by international standards of care and being up-to-date with current guidelines for refugee care is important. Reproductive health must be a core component of the overall health response to decrease mortality, morbidity, and disability among reproductive-age women in crisis situations. Immediate and exclusive breastfeeding and international standards for breastfeeding must be adhered to, especially among nutritionally at-risk Afghans who are part of OAW. Education implementors familiar with education in refugee settings are an important contributor to establish formal, informal, non-formal, accelerated, and essence-based education programs.
Partners and providers involved in any refugee setting should become familiar with updated guidelines, standards, and best practices and apply them to any operation to ensure a rights-based approach to protection, care, and the health and well-being of refugees.

The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) provides primary healthcare to 2.2 million Palestinian refugees in Jordan. This study aimed to measure patient and doctor adherence to the UNRWA guidelines for the prevention and treatment of iron deficiency anaemia in moderate to severe anaemia children, defined as haemoglobin (Hb) level <10.0 g/L.
A retrospective observational study was conducted by analysing the electronic health records of 717 children (353 boys and 364 girls) children aged 12 months old in 2018 in the Jerash Camp Health Centre, Jordan.
Patient adherence to the UNRWA guidelines was calculated by the proportion of health centre visits and doctor adherence by the proportions of Hb tests and iron supplementation among moderate to severe anaemia children at screening, first, second and third follow-up visits, respectively using STATA.
The prevalence of moderate to severe anaemia was 15.6% among 12-month-old children. After 1 month of iron supplementation, 83.7% of anaemic children improved their Hb status: mean±SD from 9.1±0.6 g/L to 10.1±1.0 g/L. Patient and doctor adherence to the UNRWA guidelines was above 80% at the screening visit but progressively decreased at follow-up visits, especially patient adherence at the third follow-up visit of 34.4%. The analysis revealed unnecessary health centre visits and iron supplementation being given to mildly anaemic children (Hb level=10.0 g/L-10.9 g/L). Additionally, children visited the health centre at an age significantly later compared with that recommended by the UNRWA guidelines for the screening, first and second follow-up visits (p-value<0.05).
Adherence to the UNRWA guidelines was above 80% at screening but much lower at follow-up visits. Urgent action is needed to improve adherence at follow-up visits and to minimise any unnecessary health centre visits and iron supplementation to mildly anaemic children.

During 2016-17, national guidelines were developed in order to provide evidence-based recommendations on health assessments for migrants and asylum seekers upon their arrival in Italy.
Scientific literature published between 2005 and 2016 was searched in different databases. A free search was also performed on international organizations\' websites in order to identify additional relevant documents. A multidisciplinary panel discussed the resulting evidence and formulated recommendations.
Evidence-based recommendations were formulated: signs and symptoms of specific diseases should to be actively searched for active TB, malaria, STI, intestinal parasites, diabetes, anaemia. In case of other health conditions (latent TB, HIV, HBV, HCV, STI, strongyloides, schistosoma, diabetes), testing should be offered to asymptomatic subjects coming from endemic areas or exposed to risk factors. Mass screening is recommended for anaemia and hypertension; a pregnancy test should be considered, while inclusion in cervical cancer screening and vaccination programs is recommended. A modulated, progressive approach was developed, covering an initial evaluation during rescue operations, a full medical examination at first line reception stage and the referral to national health services during second line reception.
It is important to produce and periodically update guidelines on these issues and local peculiarities should be taken into account in their design and implementation. Guidelines can not only support economic sustainability, but also counteract stigmatization dynamics.

暂无摘要。

Asylum seekers are at elevated risk of self-harm, and the personal and public health costs of self-harm are high; yet the monitoring and reporting of self-harm has been limited and lacking in transparency. This study aims to evaluate the quality of self-harm incident reporting across the Australian asylum seeker population, including by processing arrangements (i.e. community-based, community detention, onshore detention, Nauru, and Manus Island).
All self-harm incidents reported across the entire Australian asylum seeker population between 1 August 2014 and 31 July 2015 were obtained via the Freedom of Information Act. We assessed the quality of self-harm incident reporting according to the World Health Organization (WHO)\'s self-harm reporting guidelines.
A total of 949 self-harm incident reports were assessed. Date, location (processing arrangement), and time of self-harm were routinely reported. Gender was recorded in less than two thirds (62.1%) of all incidents. Method(s) used to self-harm was reported in 81.5% of all incidents, though IDC-10 codes were not reported in any episodes. Psychological or psychiatric assessments were recorded after 4.0% of all incidents, most frequently on Manus Island (10.9%), and in Nauru (10.0%), and least frequently in community-based arrangements (1.7%) and in onshore detention (1.4%), and not at all in community detention. Ambulances were reported as attending 2.8% of all episodes. Hospital attendances were reported following 6.0% of all self-harm incidents, with attendances most commonly reported in incidents occurring in community detention (30.3%), and in community-based arrangements (19.4%). Medevac (air ambulances) were recorded as being utilised in 0.4% of all incidents (2.1% of episodes on Nauru, 1.8% on Manus Island).
The findings of our study indicate that the accessibility and quality of self-harm data is substandard and inconsistent with WHO self-harm reporting guidelines. Such variable reporting makes the identification of self-harm trends, the implementation of prevention strategies - including those at a policy level - and the clinical management of self-harm, extremely challenging. Improved self-harm reporting and monitoring is urgently needed for mitigating and responding to self-harm risk among asylum seekers.

There have been several significant outbreaks of COVID-19 in federal immigrant detention centers, which lack clear and consistent guidelines across Department of Homeland Security (DHS) agencies to limit the spread of COVID-19. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has issued detailed guidelines for the control, prevention, and evaluation of COVID-19 in detention facilities. Although the DHS\'s Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency has stated that it complies with CDC recommendations, its policies significantly differ from these CDC guidelines, placing detainees at risk for contracting COVID-19. This submission urges the adoption of CDC guidelines across DHS-associated facilities. Such a policy change has the potential to protect and save the lives of the most vulnerable populations under the auspices of the federal government.