Journal Article > ResearchAbstract Only
J Immigr Minor Health. 2021 October 26; Volume 24 (Issue 5); 1281-1287.; DOI:10.1007/s10903-021-01298-1
Cubides JC, Peiter PC, Garone DB, Antierens A
J Immigr Minor Health. 2021 October 26; Volume 24 (Issue 5); 1281-1287.; DOI:10.1007/s10903-021-01298-1
Médecins sans Frontières (MSF) conducted a study to identify health needs and access barriers of Venezuelan migrants and refugees at La Guajira and Norte de Santander Colombian border states. The Migration History tool was used to gather information that included various health-related issues such as referred morbidity, exposure to violence, mental health, and access to health care services. A group migration profile with long-term permanence plans was identified. Was evidenced an important share of young population (50% under 20), indigenous people (20%), and returnees (11%). The respondents referred to a mixed pattern of chronic and acute diseases, for which the main difficulty was accessing diagnosis and continuous treatment. Health-seeking behavior was identified as the main barrier to access health care services. The article compiles main findings on the Venezuelan migrants and refugees' health conditions, contributing important evidence for the humanitarian responses in migration contexts.
Conference Material > Slide Presentation
Schittecatte G, Pellechia U, Meudec M, Vanlerberghe V
MSF Scientific Days International 2022. 2022 May 12; DOI:10.57740/79m2-8h12
Conference Material > Video (talk)
Hill DC
MSF Scientific Days LatAm 2022. 2022 November 30
English
Español
Português
Conference Material > Abstract
Schittecatte G, Pellechia U, Meudec M, Vanlerberghe V
MSF Scientific Days International 2022. 2022 May 12; DOI:10.57740/w55h-9b93
INTRODUCTION
Community engagement (CE) rose to prominence with the Alma Ata Declaration in 1978, and remains a concept lauded by global health actors, including MSF. CE is often described as being linked with accountability, ownership, and sustainability of health programmes. It is also linked with social determinants of health through its empowering principles. Despite the recognition of its importance, challenges remain in incorporating
CE into programmes.
METHODS
We used a qualitative, case-based approach to explore how community engagement is defined, perceived, and evaluated in MSF contexts. Our aim was to identify challenges and opportunities in truly integrating communities into humanitarian health interventions. Three projects were purposively selected, in Democratic Republic of the Congo, Lebanon, and Venezuela, aiming to represent a variety of health programmes, as well as societal diversity. Document review and 55 semi-structured interviews were conducted. Participants represented different institutional levels and positions, as well as national and international staff. Interviews were transcribed and coded iteratively, as were the operational and technical documents, institutional policies, and reports included in the document reviews. The themes that emerged in the iterative coding were
then analysed.
ETHICS
This study was approved by the MSF Ethics Review Board, and by the Institutional Review Board at the Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium.
RESULTS
We found disparity between MSF institutional policy, operational documents, and incorporation of CE at programme level. While there is policy acceptance of CE as essential, interviews show that MSF barely engages with communities in a participatory process. There is little prioritisation of CE, and lack of guidance on the processes needed to involve communities in decision making. Our results also show that despite shared claims of the importance of CE, definitions, objectives, and evaluation all vary significantly. Tensions emerge between seeing communities as active participants or as passive beneficiaries. Additional tensions appeared around whether CE was perceived as an approach for promotion of quality of care and accountability of operations, or purely as an activity to reach the organisation’s goals. Finally, while field projects may establish links with communities, MSF remains the sole decision-maker on the overall medical-humanitarian strategy. Interviewees questioned the capability of MSF to work within this community engagement approach, due to inherent power asymmetries and the predominant use of western-centred biomedical approaches. Inequalities and misconceptions between international and national staff created an additional barrier to bridging with
local communities.
CONCLUSION
If MSF is interested in improving its approach to CE, there should be a concerted effort to change the way communities are viewed with respect to the organisation‘s interventions. While a single model of CE is not possible, MSF needs to set up training on CE approaches and develop frameworks and clear objectives for CE, through dedicated resources at headquarters and field levels.
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
None declared.
Community engagement (CE) rose to prominence with the Alma Ata Declaration in 1978, and remains a concept lauded by global health actors, including MSF. CE is often described as being linked with accountability, ownership, and sustainability of health programmes. It is also linked with social determinants of health through its empowering principles. Despite the recognition of its importance, challenges remain in incorporating
CE into programmes.
METHODS
We used a qualitative, case-based approach to explore how community engagement is defined, perceived, and evaluated in MSF contexts. Our aim was to identify challenges and opportunities in truly integrating communities into humanitarian health interventions. Three projects were purposively selected, in Democratic Republic of the Congo, Lebanon, and Venezuela, aiming to represent a variety of health programmes, as well as societal diversity. Document review and 55 semi-structured interviews were conducted. Participants represented different institutional levels and positions, as well as national and international staff. Interviews were transcribed and coded iteratively, as were the operational and technical documents, institutional policies, and reports included in the document reviews. The themes that emerged in the iterative coding were
then analysed.
ETHICS
This study was approved by the MSF Ethics Review Board, and by the Institutional Review Board at the Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium.
RESULTS
We found disparity between MSF institutional policy, operational documents, and incorporation of CE at programme level. While there is policy acceptance of CE as essential, interviews show that MSF barely engages with communities in a participatory process. There is little prioritisation of CE, and lack of guidance on the processes needed to involve communities in decision making. Our results also show that despite shared claims of the importance of CE, definitions, objectives, and evaluation all vary significantly. Tensions emerge between seeing communities as active participants or as passive beneficiaries. Additional tensions appeared around whether CE was perceived as an approach for promotion of quality of care and accountability of operations, or purely as an activity to reach the organisation’s goals. Finally, while field projects may establish links with communities, MSF remains the sole decision-maker on the overall medical-humanitarian strategy. Interviewees questioned the capability of MSF to work within this community engagement approach, due to inherent power asymmetries and the predominant use of western-centred biomedical approaches. Inequalities and misconceptions between international and national staff created an additional barrier to bridging with
local communities.
CONCLUSION
If MSF is interested in improving its approach to CE, there should be a concerted effort to change the way communities are viewed with respect to the organisation‘s interventions. While a single model of CE is not possible, MSF needs to set up training on CE approaches and develop frameworks and clear objectives for CE, through dedicated resources at headquarters and field levels.
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
None declared.
Conference Material > Slide Presentation
Hill DC
MSF Scientific Days LatAm 2022. 2022 November 30
Journal Article > ReviewFull Text
Int J Infect Dis. 2018 June 8; Volume 71; DOI:10.1016/j.ijid.2018.05.002
Blumberg LH, Prieto MA, Diaz JV, Blanco MJ, Valle B, et al.
Int J Infect Dis. 2018 June 8; Volume 71; DOI:10.1016/j.ijid.2018.05.002
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
Travel Med Infect Dis. 2021 May 1; Volume 41; 102059.; DOI:10.1016/j.tmaid.2021.102059
Urrunaga-Pastor D, Bendezu-Quispe G, Herrera-Anazco P, Uyen-Cateriano A, Toro-Huamanchumo CJ, et al.
Travel Med Infect Dis. 2021 May 1; Volume 41; 102059.; DOI:10.1016/j.tmaid.2021.102059
BACKGROUND
Determinants of vaccine acceptance are multifactorial, complex, and in most cases, context-dependent. We determined the prevalence of COVID-19 vaccination intention (VI) and fear of its adverse effects (FAE) as well as their associated factors in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC).
METHODS
We conducted a secondary cross-sectional analysis of a database collected by the University of Maryland and Facebook. We included participants aged 18 and over from LAC surveyed, January 15 to February 1, 2021. We evaluated VI, FAE, sociodemographic characteristics, COVID-19 symptomatology, compliance with community mitigation strategies, food and economic insecurity, mental health evaluation and the influence in VI when recommended by different stakeholders. We calculated crude and adjusted prevalence ratios with their 95%CIs.
RESULTS
We analyzed 472,521 responses by Latin American adults, finding a VI and FAE prevalence of 80.0% and 81.2%, respectively. We found that female and non-binary genders were associated with a lower probability of VI and a higher probability of FAE. Besides, living in a town, village or rural area and economic insecurity was associated with a higher FAE probability. The fears of becoming seriously ill, a family member becoming seriously ill from COVID-19 and having depressive symptoms were associated with a higher probability of VI and FAE.
CONCLUSION
Eight out of 10 adults in LAC have VI and FAE. The factors identified are useful for the development of communication strategies to reduce FAE frequency. It is necessary to guarantee mass vaccination and support the return of economic activities.
Determinants of vaccine acceptance are multifactorial, complex, and in most cases, context-dependent. We determined the prevalence of COVID-19 vaccination intention (VI) and fear of its adverse effects (FAE) as well as their associated factors in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC).
METHODS
We conducted a secondary cross-sectional analysis of a database collected by the University of Maryland and Facebook. We included participants aged 18 and over from LAC surveyed, January 15 to February 1, 2021. We evaluated VI, FAE, sociodemographic characteristics, COVID-19 symptomatology, compliance with community mitigation strategies, food and economic insecurity, mental health evaluation and the influence in VI when recommended by different stakeholders. We calculated crude and adjusted prevalence ratios with their 95%CIs.
RESULTS
We analyzed 472,521 responses by Latin American adults, finding a VI and FAE prevalence of 80.0% and 81.2%, respectively. We found that female and non-binary genders were associated with a lower probability of VI and a higher probability of FAE. Besides, living in a town, village or rural area and economic insecurity was associated with a higher FAE probability. The fears of becoming seriously ill, a family member becoming seriously ill from COVID-19 and having depressive symptoms were associated with a higher probability of VI and FAE.
CONCLUSION
Eight out of 10 adults in LAC have VI and FAE. The factors identified are useful for the development of communication strategies to reduce FAE frequency. It is necessary to guarantee mass vaccination and support the return of economic activities.
Conference Material > Video (talk)
Schittecatte G
MSF Scientific Days International 2022. 2022 June 7; DOI:10.57740/gtpv-x449
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
Health (Irvine Calif). 2021 September 30; Volume 7 (Issue 10); e08091.; DOI:10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e08091
Benites-Zapata VA, Urrunaga-Pastor D, Solorzano-Vargas ML, Herrera-Anazco P, Uyen-Cateriano A, et al.
Health (Irvine Calif). 2021 September 30; Volume 7 (Issue 10); e08091.; DOI:10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e08091
OBJECTIVE
We assessed the prevalence of food insecurity (FI) and its associated factors in Latin American and the Caribbean (LAC) early during the COVID-19 pandemic.
METHODS
We performed secondary data analysis of a survey conducted by Facebook and the University of Maryland. We included adults surveyed from April to May 2020. FI was measured by concerns about having enough to eat during the following week. Sociodemographic, mental health, and COVID-19-related variables were collected. We performed generalized Poisson regressions models considering the complex sampling design. We estimated crude and adjusted prevalence ratios with their 95% confidence intervals.
RESULTS
We included 1,324,272 adults; 50.5% were female, 42.9% were under 35 years old, 78.9% lived in a city, and 18.6% had COVID-19 symptoms. The prevalence of food insecurity in LAC was 75.7% (n = 1,016,841), with Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Haiti with 90.8%, 86.7%, and 85.5%, respectively, showing the highest prevalence. Gender, area of residence, presence of COVID-19 symptoms, and fear of getting seriously ill or that a family member gets seriously ill from COVID-19 were associated with a higher prevalence of food insecurity. In contrast, increasing age was associated with a lower prevalence.
CONCLUSION
The prevalence of food insecurity during the first stage of the COVID-19 pandemic in LAC was high and was associated with sociodemographic and COVID-19-related variables.
We assessed the prevalence of food insecurity (FI) and its associated factors in Latin American and the Caribbean (LAC) early during the COVID-19 pandemic.
METHODS
We performed secondary data analysis of a survey conducted by Facebook and the University of Maryland. We included adults surveyed from April to May 2020. FI was measured by concerns about having enough to eat during the following week. Sociodemographic, mental health, and COVID-19-related variables were collected. We performed generalized Poisson regressions models considering the complex sampling design. We estimated crude and adjusted prevalence ratios with their 95% confidence intervals.
RESULTS
We included 1,324,272 adults; 50.5% were female, 42.9% were under 35 years old, 78.9% lived in a city, and 18.6% had COVID-19 symptoms. The prevalence of food insecurity in LAC was 75.7% (n = 1,016,841), with Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Haiti with 90.8%, 86.7%, and 85.5%, respectively, showing the highest prevalence. Gender, area of residence, presence of COVID-19 symptoms, and fear of getting seriously ill or that a family member gets seriously ill from COVID-19 were associated with a higher prevalence of food insecurity. In contrast, increasing age was associated with a lower prevalence.
CONCLUSION
The prevalence of food insecurity during the first stage of the COVID-19 pandemic in LAC was high and was associated with sociodemographic and COVID-19-related variables.