The nexus of immigration regulation and health governance: a scoping review of the extent to which right to access healthcare by migrants, refugees and asylum seekers was upheld in the United Kingdom during COVID-19

M C Van Hout,R Madroumi,M D Andrews,R Arnold,V D Hope,M Taegtmeyer
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2024.04.012
IF: 4.984
Public Health
Abstract:Objectives: Complementing the well-established evidence base on health inequalities experienced by migrants, refugees and asylum seekers in the UK; we examined the extent to which their right to equal non-discriminatory access to health services (promotive, preventive, curative) was upheld during the COVID-19 pandemic. Study design: Arksey and O'Malley's scoping review framework. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted on Medline, PubMed, and CINAHL using detailed MESH terms, for literature published between 01 January 2020 and 01 January 2024. The process was supported by a ten-page Google search and hand searching of reference lists. 42 records meeting the inclusion criteria were charted, coded inductively and analysed thematically in an integrated team-based approach. Results: Dissonance between immigration regulation and health governance is illustrated in four themes: Health systems leveraged to (re)enforce the hostile environment; Dissonance between health rights on paper and in practice; Structural failures to overcome communication and digital exclusion; and COVID-19 vaccine (in)equity exacerbated fear, mistrust and exclusion. Migrants, refugees and asylum seekers encountered substantial individual, structural and policy-level barriers to accessing healthcare in the UK during COVID-19. Insecure immigration status, institutional mistrust, data-sharing and charging fears, communication challenges and digital exclusion impacted heavily on their ability to access healthcare in an equitable non-discriminatory manner. Conclusions: An inclusive and innovative health equity and rights-based responses reaching all migrants, refugees and asylum seekers are warranted if the National Health Service is to live up to its promise of 'leaving no one behind' in post-pandemic and future responses.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?