Introduction: Many refugees face challenges accessing water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) services. However, there is limited literature on WASH access for refugee populations, including for menstrual health services. Unmet WASH access needs may therefore be hidden, amplifying morbidity and mortality risks for already vulnerable refugee populations. The aim of this study was therefore to quantitatively analyze WASH access among refugee camps, with a focus on households with women of reproductive age. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study that utilized the Standardized WASH Knowledge, Attitude and Practice (KAP) Survey. A total of 5632 household questionnaires were completed by the United Nations Refugee Agency in 2019 in 21 refugee camps and settlements in Bangladesh, Kenya, South Sudan, Uganda, and Zimbabwe. WASH access (14 items) and social and geographic stratifiers were analyzed at the household-level including the refugee camp, country of the settlement, having women of reproductive age, members with disability/elderly status, and household size. We calculated frequencies, odds ratios, and performed bivariate and multivariate analyses to measure inequalities. We developed a Female WASH Access Index to characterize WASH access for households with women of reproductive age. Results: Most refugee households had high levels of access to improved water (95%), low levels of access to waste disposal facility (64%) and sanitation privacy (63%), and very low access to basic sanitation (30%) and hand hygiene facility (24%). 76% of households with women of reproductive age had access to menstrual health materials. WASH access indicators and the Female WASH Access Index showed large inequalities across social and geographic stratifiers. Households with disabled or elderly members, and fewer members had poorer WASH access. Households with women of reproductive age had lower access to basic sanitation. Conclusions: Large inequalities in WASH access indicators were identified between refugee sites and across countries, in all metrics. We found high levels of access to improved water across most of the refugee camps and settlements studied. Access to basic hygiene and sanitation, sanitation privacy, waste disposal, and menstrual health materials, could be improved across refugee sites. Households with women of reproductive age, with 4+ members, and without members with disability/elderly status were associated with higher WASH access. The female WASH access index piloted here could be a useful tool to quickly summarize WASH access in households with women of reproductive age.

Background: People who inject drugs may be at elevated SARS-CoV-2 risk due to their living conditions and/or exposures when seeking or using drugs. No study to date has reported upon risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection among people who inject drugs. Methods and findings: Between October, 2020 and June, 2021, participants aged ≥18 years from San Diego, California, USA and Tijuana, Baja California, Mexico who injected drugs within the last month underwent interviews and testing for SARS-CoV-2 RNA and antibodies. Binomial regressions identified correlates of SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity. Results: Of 386 participants, SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence was 36.3% (95% CI: 31.5%-41.1%); 92.1% had detectable IgM antibodies. Only 37.5% had previously been tested. Seroprevalence did not differ by country of residence. None tested RNA-positive. Most (89.5%) reported engaging in ≥1 protective behavior [e.g., facemasks (73.5%), social distancing (46.5%), or increasing handwashing/sanitizers (22.8%)]. In a multivariate model controlling for sex, older age, and Hispanic/Latinx/Mexican ethnicity were independently associated with SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity, as was engaging in sex work (AdjRR: 1.63; 95% CI: 1.18–2.27) and having been incarcerated in the past six months (AdjRR: 1.49; 95% CI: 0.97–2.27). Comorbidities and substance using behaviors were not associated with SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity. Conclusions: In this community-based study of people who inject drugs in the San Diego-Tijuana border region, over one third were SARS-CoV-2 seropositive, exceeding estimates from the general population in either city. We found no evidence that substance use behaviors were associated with an elevated risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, but observed that circumstances in the risk environment, notably sex work and incarceration, were independently associated with higher SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence. Our findings suggest that a binational policy response to COVID-19 mitigation is warranted beyond the closure of the U.S.-Mexico border. Furthermore, decriminalizing sex work and drug use could reduce the burden of COVID-19 among people who inject drugs.

The US deports more Mexicans to Tijuana than any other borderland city. Returning involuntarily as members of a stigmatized underclass, many find themselves homeless and de-facto stateless. Subject to routinized police victimization, many take refuge in the Tijuana River Canal (El Bordo). Previous reports suggest Tijuana River water may be contaminated but prior studies have not accessed the health effects or contamination of the water closest to the river residents. A binational, transdisciplinary team undertook a socio-environmental, mixed methods assessment to simultaneously characterize Tijuana River water quality with chemical testing, assess the frequency of El Bordo residents’ water-related diseases, and trace water contacts with epidemiological survey methods (n = 85 adults, 18+) in 2019, and ethnographic methods in 2019–2021. Our analysis brings the structural violence framework into conversation with an environmental injustice perspective to documented how social forces drive poor health outcomes enacted through the environment. The Tijuana River water most proximate to its human inhabitants fails numerous water-quality standards, posing acute health risks. Escherichia coli values were ∼40,000 times the Mexican regulatory standard for directly contacted water. Skin infections (47%), dehydration (40%) and diarrhea (28%) were commonly reported among El Bordo residents. Residents are aware the water is contaminated and strive to minimize harm to their health by differentially using local water sources. Their numerous survival constraints, however, are exacerbated by routine police violence which propels residents and other people who inject drugs into involuntary contact with contaminated water. Human rights to drinking water, sanitation and hygiene are routinely violated among El Bordo in-habitants. This is exacerbated by violent policing practices that force unhoused deportees to seek refuge in waterways, and drive water contacts. Furthermore, US-Mexico ‘free-trade’ agreements drive rapid growth in Tijuana, restrict Mexican environmental regulation enforcement, and drive underinvestment in sewage systems and infrastructure.

This viewpoint addresses the lack of gender diversity in medical leadership in Latin America and the gap in evidence on gender dimensions of the health workforce. While Latin America has experienced a dramatic change in the gender demographic of the medical field, the health sector employment pipeline is rife with entrenched and systemic gender inequities that continue to perpetuate a devaluation of women; ultimately resulting in an under-representation of women in medical leadership. Using data available in the public domain, we describe and critique the trajectory of women in medicine and characterize the magnitude of gender inequity in health system leadership over time and across the region, drawing on historical data from Mexico as an illustrative case. We propose recommendations that stand to disrupt the status quo to more appropriately value women and their representation at the highest levels of decision making for health. We call for adequate measurement of equity in medical leadership as a matter of national, regional, and global priority and propose the establishment of a regional observatory to monitor and evaluate meaningful progress towards gender parity in the health sector as well as in medical leadership.

The aim of this study was to compare the health policies for international migrants in Mexico and Colombia. A descriptive comparative study of the documents issued by the national-level government of the most recent past administrations in each country (2012–2018 for Mexico, 2013–2018 for Colombia) was conducted. We identified the documents' objectives, strategies, and evaluation of results, and the representation of international migrants and migrant health in the policy. Both countries situate health care policies for international migrants in a human rights framework. In both, migrants are entitled to health care, but access is limited by migration status. The main contrasts are the focus on different migrant populations (Mexican migrants in the Mexico-US migration circuit in Mexico; Venezuelan immigrants and Colombians returning from Venezuela in Colombia), and the discursive framing of policies as a response to the crisis in Colombia. As a result, while concrete actions are detailed in the Colombian policies, most documents in Mexico are limited to general strategies. These differences can be explained by the context in which each set of policies was issued: a relatively stable Mexico-US migration flow in Mexico, and the reception of hundreds of thousands of migrants from Venezuela in a very short time in Colombia. Tradition in matters of migration, and the current migration context, influence health policies for migrant populations.