Background: There is increasing attention paid to the arrival of migrants from outwith the EU region to the European countries. Healthcare that is universally and equably accessible needs to be provided for these migrants throughout the range of national contexts and in response to complex and evolving individual needs. It is important to look at the evidence available on provision and access to healthcare for migrants to identify barriers to accessing healthcare and better plan necessary changes. Methods: This review scoped 77 papers from nine European countries (Austria, Cyprus, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Malta, Spain, and Sweden) in English and in country-specific languages in order to provide an overview of migrants’ access to healthcare. The review aims at identifying what is known about access to healthcare as well as healthcare use of migrants and refugees in the EU member states. The evidence included documents from 2011 onwards. Results: The literature reviewed confirms that despite the aspiration to ensure equality of access to healthcare, there is evidence of persistent inequalities between migrants and non-migrants in access to healthcare services. The evidence shows unmet healthcare needs, especially when it comes to mental and dental health as well as the existence of legal barriers in accessing healthcare. Language and communication barriers, overuse of emergency services and underuse of primary healthcare services as well as discrimination are described. Conclusions: The European situation concerning migrants’ and refugees’ health status and access to healthcare is heterogeneous and it is difficult to compare and draw any firm conclusions due to the scant evidence. Different diseases are prioritised by different countries, although these priorities do not always correspond to the expressed needs or priorities of the migrants. Mental healthcare, preventive care (immunization) and long-term care in the presence of a growing migrant older population are identified as priorities that deserve greater attention. There is a need to improve the existing data on migrants’ health status, needs and access to healthcare to be able to tailor care to the needs of migrants. To conduct research that highlights migrants’ own views on their health and barriers to access to healthcare is key.

Urbanization, costs of green space maintenance, and diminishing connection between people and nature all exert pressures on urban green space. This is regrettable as green space has the potential to create wins for environmental sustainability, health, and health equity. This paper explores this potential triple win and investigates how to increase the use of urban green space through behavior change. A narrative literature review was conducted and was supplemented with literature suggested by experts. Results show that creating well-designed green spaces and stimulating people to use them can indeed deliver this triple win. Providing accessible, attractive, well-maintained green space with room for socialization, and where people feel safe, may increase the opportunity and motivation of people to use it more often. Informing and educating people and organizing activities may increase capability (and motivation) to use green space. Since the use of green space depends on life stage, lifestyle factors and individual values, it is important to involve potential users in its design. We recommend a specific focus on those groups who may benefit most from the use of green space. More evaluation is needed to inform effective green space interventions and to assess related economic, social, and environmental benefits.

Background: Discrimination based on ethnicity and the lack of translation services in healthcare have been identified as main barriers to healthcare access. However, the actual experiences of migrant patients in Europe are rarely present in the literature. Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess healthcare discrimination as perceived by migrants themselves and the availability of translation services in the healthcare systems of Europe. Methods: A total of 1407 migrants in 10 European Union countries (consortium members of the Mig-HealthCare project) were surveyed concerning healthcare discrimination, access to healthcare services, and need of translation services using an interviewer-administered questionnaire. Migrants in three countries were excluded from the analysis, due to small sample size, and the new sample consisted of N = 1294 migrants. Descriptive statistics and multivariable regression analyses were conducted to investigate the risk factors on perceived healthcare discrimination for migrants and refugees in the EU. Results: Mean age was 32 (±11) years and 816 (63.26%) participants were males. The majority came from Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, Nigeria, and Iran. Older migrants reported better treatment experience. Migrants in Italy (0.191; 95% CI [0.029, 0.352]) and Austria (0.167; 95% CI [0.012, 0.323]) scored higher in the Discrimination Scale to Medical Settings (DMS) compared with Spain. Additionally, migrants with better mental health scored lower in the DMS scale (0.994; 95% CI [0.993, 0.996]), while those with no legal permission in Greece tended to perceive more healthcare discrimination compared with migrants with some kind of permission (1.384; 95% CI [1.189, 1.611]), as opposed to Austria (0.763; 95% CI [0.632, 0.922]). Female migrants had higher odds of needing healthcare assistance but not being able to access them compared with males (1.613; 95% CI [1.183, 2.199]). Finally, migrants with chronic problems had the highest odds of needing and not having access to healthcare services compared with migrants who had other health problems (3.292; 95% CI [1.585, 6.837]). Conclusions: Development of culturally sensitive and linguistically diverse healthcare services should be one of the main aims of relevant health policies and strategies at the European level in order to respond to the unmet needs of the migrant population.

Background: Strengthening community-based healthcare is a valuable strategy to reduce health inequalities and improve the integration of migrants and refugees into local communities in the European Union. However, little is known about how to effectively develop and run community-based healthcare models for migrants and refugees. Aiming at identifying the most-promising best practices, we performed a scoping review of the international academic literature into effective community-based healthcare models and interventions for migrants and refugees as part of the Mig-HealthCare project. Methods: A systematic search in PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus databases was conducted in March 2018 following the PRISMA methodology. Data extraction from eligible publications included information on general study characteristics, a brief description of the intervention/model, and reported outcomes in terms of effectiveness and challenges. Subsequently, we critically assessed the available evidence per type of healthcare service according to specific criteria to establish a shortlist of the most promising best practices. Results: In total, 118 academic publications were critically reviewed and categorized in the thematic areas of mental health (n = 53), general health services (n = 36), noncommunicable diseases (n = 13), primary healthcare (n = 9), and women’s maternal and child health (n = 7). Conclusion: A set of 15 of the most-promising best practices and tools in community-based healthcare for migrants and refugees were identified that include several intervention approaches per thematic category. The elements of good communication, the linguistic barriers and the cultural differences, played crucial roles in the effective application of the interventions. The close collaboration of the various stakeholders, the local communities, the migrant/refugee communities, and the partnerships is a key element in the successful implementation of primary healthcare provision.

In this study, we collect and synthesize information on the health status of the refugee/migrant population in ten European countries in order to map refugee/migrant health needs. With this information, we identify areas of intervention and healthcare system strengthening to provide the basis for future health planning and effective healthcare provision to migrants, asylum-seekers and refugees in the European Union (EU). Methods: 1407 migrants in ten European Union countries (consortium members of the Mig-HealthCare project) were surveyed on general health, mental health, and specific diseases using an interviewer-administered questionnaire. Descriptive statistics and multivariable linear regression analyses were conducted to investigate the risk factors on general quality of life for migrants and refugees in the EU. Results: Mean age was 31.9 (±11.05) years and 889 (63.1%) participants were males. The majority came from Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, Nigeria, and Iran. Having a mental health disorder or a chronic disease such as a heart or respiratory disease was associated with worse general health. On the other hand, having permission to stay in the country of interview and being interviewed in the country of final destination was associated with better general health. Access to health care services was fragmented or unavailable for some interviewees because of linguistic, cultural, or administrative barriers. Conclusions: The management of chronic diseases and mental health conditions in European migrants and refugees is a key priority for health service provision. Further efforts should be made to guarantee healthcare access for migrant and refugee populations.

Many healthcare professionals are unaware of the necessary skills and barriers hindering interpersonal health communication. This study aimed to evaluate the healthcare professional’s perception regarding health communication training’s necessity, barriers, facilitators and critical skills in health communication. Data from a cross-sectional online survey in the framework of the H-Com project were utilized. The study included 691 healthcare professionals (physicians, nurses, students and allied health professionals) from seven European countries. Only 57% of participants had participated in health communication training, while 88.1% of them indicated a willingness to be trained in health communication. Nurses were more likely (OR = 1.84; 95% CI 1.16, 2.91) to have received such training, compared to physicians. Most examined communication skills, barriers and facilitators of effective communication, and perceived outcomes of successful communication were considered crucial for most participants, although physicians overall seemed to be less concerned. Most agreed perceived outcomes were improved professional–patient relations, patient and professional satisfaction, physical and psychological health amelioration and patients’ trust. Nurses evaluated the importance of these communication skills and communication barriers, facilitators and outcomes higher than physicians. Physicians may underestimate the importance of communication skills more than nurses. Health communication should become an integral part of training for all health professionals.