Search

Ethnic diversity and racism have not featured strongly in English research, policy or practice centred on understanding and addressing health inequalities. However, the COVID-19 pandemic and the Black Lives Matter movement have shone fresh light on deep-rooted ethnic inequalities and mobilised large segments of the population into anti-racist demonstration. These recent developments suggest that, despite strong counterforces within national government and the mainstream media, there could be a shift towards greater public awareness of racism and potentially a willingness to take individual and collective action. This paper addresses these developments, and specifically engages with the contested notion of 'allyship'. We bring together the experiences of 25 young adults living across England and prior literature to raise questions about whether and how racialized White individuals can play a role in dismantling systemic racism and reducing ethnic inequalities in health. Our analysis reveals a variety of complexities and obstacles to effective and widespread allyship. Findings suggest the need to nurture contingent, responsive and reflexive forms of allyship that can attend to the harms inflicted upon racially minoritized people as well as push for systemic transformation. White allyship will need to take a variety of forms, but it must be underpinned by an understanding of racism as institutional and systemic and a commitment to tackling interlocking systems of oppression through solidarity. The issues addressed are relevant to those occupying public health research, policy and practice roles, as well as members of the public, in England and other multi-racial settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Global migration from hepatitis B endemic countries poses a significant public health challenge in receiving low-prevalence countries. In the UK, Chinese migrants are a high risk group for hepatitis B. However, they are an underserved population that infrequently accesses healthcare. This study sought to increase understanding of the determinants of hepatitis B testing and healthcare access among migrants of Chinese ethnicity living in England.Methods: We sought to obtain and integrate insights from different key stakeholders in the system. We conducted six focus group discussions and 20 in-depth interviews with community members and patients identifying themselves as 'Chinese', and interviewed 21 clinicians and nine health service commissioners. Data were thematically analysed and findings were corroborated through two validation workshops.Results: Three thematic categories emerged: knowledge and awareness, visibility of the disease, and health service issues. Low disease knowledge and awareness levels among community members contributed to erroneous personal risk perception and suboptimal engagement with services. Limited clinician knowledge led to missed opportunities to test and inaccurate assessments of infection risks in Chinese patients. There was little social discourse and considerable stigma linked to the disease among some sub-sections of the Chinese population. A lack of visibility of the issue and the population within the health system meant that these health needs were not prioritised by clinicians or commissioners. Service accessibility was also affected by the lack of language support. Greater use of community outreach, consultation aids, 'cultural competency' training, and locally adapted testing protocols may help.Conclusions: Hepatitis B among migrants of Chinese ethnicity in England can be characterised as an invisible disease in an invisible population. Multi-modal solutions are needed to tackle barriers within this population and the health system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is now widely accepted that context matters in evaluations of the health inequalities impact of community-based social initiatives. Systems thinking offers a lens for uncovering the dynamic relationship between such initiatives and their social contexts. However, there are very few examples that show how a systems approach can be applied in practice and what kinds of evidence are produced when this happens. In this paper, we use data from ethnographic fieldwork embedded within a multi-site mixed method evaluation to demonstrate how a systems approach can be applied in practice to evaluate the early stages of an area-based empowerment initiative – Big Local (funded by the Big Lottery Fund and delivered by Local Trust). Taking place in 150 different local areas in England and underpinned by an ethos of resident-led collective action, Big Local offers an illustration of the applicability of a systems approach to better understand the change processes that emerge as social initiatives embed and co-evolve within a series of local contexts. Findings reveal which parts of the social system are likely to be changed, by what mechanisms, and with what implications. They also raise some salient considerations for knowledge generation and methods development in public health evaluation, particularly for the evaluation of social initiatives where change does not necessarily happen in linear or predictable ways. We suggest future evaluations of such initiatives require the use of more flexible designs, encompassing qualitative approaches capable of capturing the complexity of relational systems processes, alongside more traditional quantitative methods. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Inequitable healthcare access, experiences and outcomes across ethnic groups are of concern across many countries. Progress on this agenda appears limited in England given the apparently strong legal and policy framework. This disjuncture raises questions about how central government policy is translated into local services. Healthcare commissioning organisations are a potentially powerful influence on services, but have rarely been examined from an equity perspective. We undertook a mixed method exploration of English Primary Care Trust (PCT) commissioning in 2010–12, to identify barriers and enablers to commissioning that addresses ethnic healthcare inequities, employing:- in-depth interviews with 19 national Key Informants; documentation of 10 good practice examples; detailed case studies of three PCTs (70+ interviews; extensive observational work and documentary analysis); three national stakeholder workshops. We found limited and patchy attention to ethnic diversity and inequity within English healthcare commissioning. Marginalization of this agenda, along with ambivalence, a lack of clarity and limited confidence, perpetuated a reinforcing inter-play between individual managers, their organisational setting and the wider policy context. Despite the apparent contrary indications, ethnic equity was a peripheral concern within national healthcare policy; poorly aligned with other more dominant agendas. Locally, consideration of ethnicity was often treated as a matter of legal compliance rather than integral to understanding and meeting healthcare needs. Many managers and teams did not consider tackling ethnic healthcare inequities to be part-and-parcel of their job, lacked confidence and skills to do so, and questioned the legitimacy of such work. Our findings indicate the need to enhance the skills, confidence and competence of individual managers and commissioning teams and to improve organizational structures and processes that support attention to ethnic inequity. Greater political will and clearer national direction is also required to produce the system change needed to embed action on ethnic inequity within healthcare commissioning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

AimTo determine whether an intervention designed to enhance research capacity among commissioners in the area of ethnicity and health was feasible and impactful, and to identify programme elements that might usefully be replicated elsewhere.BackgroundHow healthcare commissioners should be equipped to understand and address multiethnic needs has received little attention to-date. Being able to mobilise and apply evidence is a central element of the commissioning process that requires development. Researching ethnicity and health is widely recognised as challenging and several prior interventions have aimed to enhance competence in this area. These have, however, predominantly taken place in North America and have not been evaluated in detail.MethodsAn innovative research capacity development programme was delivered to public health staff within a large healthcare commissioning organisation in England. Evaluation methodology drew on ‘pluralistic’ evaluation principles and included formative and summative elements. Participant evaluation forms gave immediate feedback during the programme. Participants also provided feedback at two weeks and 12 months after the programme ended. In addition, one participant and one facilitator provided reflective accounts of the programme's strengths and weaknesses, and programme impact was traced through ongoing partnership work.FindingsThe programme was well received and had a tangible impact on knowledge, confidence and practice for most participants. Factors important to success included: embedding learning within the participants’ work context; ensuring a balance between theory and practical tips to enhance confidence; and having sustained interaction between trainers and participants. Despite positive signs, the challenging nature of the topic was highlighted, as were wider structural and cultural factors that impede progress in this area. Although it is unrealistic to expect such programmes to have a major impact on commissioning practices, they may well make an important contribution to raising the confidence and competence of staff to undertake work in this area. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background: Addressing health inequalities remains a prominent policy objective of the current UK government, but current NHS reforms involve a significant shift in roles and responsibilities. Clinicians are now placed at the heart of healthcare commissioning through which significant inequalities in access, uptake and impact of healthcare services must be addressed. Questions arise as to whether these new arrangements will help or hinder progress on health inequalities. This paper explores the perspectives of experienced healthcare professionals working within the commissioning arena; many of whom are likely to remain key actors in this unfolding scenario. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 42 professionals involved with health and social care commissioning at national and local levels. These included representatives from the Department of Health, Primary Care Trusts, Strategic Health Authorities, Local Authorities, and third sector organisations. Results: In general, respondents lamented the lack of progress on health inequalities during the PCT commissioning era, where strong policy had not resulted in measurable improvements. However, there was concern that GP-led commissioning will fare little better, particularly in a time of reduced spending. Specific concerns centred on: reduced commitment to a health inequalities agenda; inadequate skills and loss of expertise; and weakened partnership working and engagement. There were more mixed opinions as to whether GP commissioners would be better able than their predecessors to challenge large provider trusts and shift spend towards prevention and early intervention, and whether GPs' clinical experience would support commissioning action on inequalities. Though largely pessimistic, respondents highlighted some opportunities, including the potential for greater accountability of healthcare commissioners to the public and more influential needs assessments via emergent Health & Wellbeing Boards. Conclusions: There is doubt about the ability of GP commissioners to take clearer action on health inequalities than PCTs have historically achieved. Key actors expect the contribution from commissioning to address health inequalities to become even more piecemeal in the new arrangements, as it will be dependent upon the interest and agency of particular individuals within the new commissioning groups to engage and influence a wider range of stakeholders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore potential benefits in aligning Joint Strategic Needs Assessments (JSNAs) with implementation of the Equality Delivery System (EDS) to improve commissioning of healthcare for minority ethnic groups. Design/methodology/approach – The paper draws on data gathered for a large research study carried out in England exploring the use of evidence in commissioning for multi-ethnic populations, to present a reflective discussion on the potential synergies between JSNA and EDS processes. Qualitative data were collected from 62 interviews with stakeholders in Sheffield, Leeds and Bradford, who, as part of their normal role, had an active responsibility to contribute to decision making for commissioning healthcare. 19 individuals working in national roles with experience in evidence use, ethnicity and commissioning across NHS, local authorities and third sector were also interviewed. Observational data were collected through regular attendance at an NHS Equality Group, which had Equality Delivery System implementation within its remit, and from a regional workshop focussing on Joint Strategic Needs Assessment improvements. Observations also came via participation in local EDS implementation meetings across Sheffield, Leeds and Bradford. These data were supplemented by a review of local and national policy literature about implementing JSNA and EDS. Findings – Formally strengthening the connection between JSNAs and the EDS has potential benefits for enhancing the evidence base about health and wellbeing needs of minority groups in general, and ethnic minorities in particular. Originality/value – NHS and Local Authority organisations need to establish structural processes to formally connect these two workstreams and to ensure adequate resource is made available, with clear direction from senior management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Detailed qualitative data are used to explore the processes perpetuating labour market disadvantage among young UK-Bangladeshi men living in central London. Strong forces of inclusion within the Bangladeshi community are found to interact with forces of exclusion from 'mainstream' society to constrain aspirations and limit opportunities. Though diverse forms of young Bangladeshi masculinity are found, a common pattern is heavy dependency on intra-ethnic networks. Negative experiences of and isolation from 'mainstream' society further reinforce reliance on 'our own people'. However, acute ambivalence towards belonging to a dense Bangladeshi community exists, exemplified in the widespread denigration of the restaurant trade. Many respondents express the desire to 'break out' and access new experiences. The findings support current policy emphasis on 'connecting people to work' but highlight the more fundamental need to connect people across ethnic boundaries. The paper urges researchers to 'unpack' ethnicity - to consider carefully what ethnic identity implies in terms of access to resources and opportunities for different individuals in different contexts - in order better to understand the diversity of labour market outcomes and the persistence of disadvantage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A growing body of research attests to the impact of welfare regimes on health and health equity. However, the mechanisms that link different kinds of welfare entitlement to health outcomes are less well understood. This study analysed the accounts of 29 older adults in England to delineate how the form of entitlement to welfare and other resources (specifically, whether this was understood as a universal entitlement or as targeted to those in need) impacts on the determinants of health. Mechanisms directly affecting access to material resources (through deterring uptake of benefits) have been well documented, but those that operate through psychosocial and more structural pathways less so, in part because they are more challenging to identify. Entitlement that was understood collectively, or as arising from financial or other contributions to a social body, had positive impacts on wellbeing beyond material gains, including facilitating access to important health determinants: social contact, recognition and integration. Entitlement understood as targeted in terms of individualised concepts of need or vulnerability deterred access to material resources, but also fostered debate about legitimacy, thus contributing to negative impacts on individual wellbeing and the public health through the erosion of social integration. This has important implications for both policy and evaluation. Calls to target welfare benefits at those in most need emphasise direct material pathways to health impact. We suggest a model for considering policy change and evaluation which also takes into account how psychosocial and structural pathways are affected by the nature of entitlement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While social and spatial determinants of biomarkers have been reported, no previous study has examined both together within an intersectional perspective. We present a novel extension of quantitative intersectional analyses using cross-classified multilevel models to explore how intersectional positions and neighbourhood deprivation are associated with biomarkers, using baseline UK Biobank data (collected from 2006 to 2010). Our results suggest intersectional inequalities in biomarkers of healthy ageing are mostly established by age 40-49, but different intersections show different relationships with deprivation. Our study suggests that certain biosocial pathways are more strongly implicated in how neighbourhoods and intersectional positions affect healthy ageing than others. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A third of children born in England have at least one parent born outside the United Kingdom (UK), yet family migration history is infrequently studied as a social determinant of child health. We describe rates of hospital admissions in children aged up to 5 years by parental migration and socioeconomic group., Methods: Birth registrations linked to Hospital Episode Statistics were used to derive a cohort of 4,174,596 children born in state-funded hospitals in England between 2008 and 2014, with follow-up until age 5 years. We looked at eight maternal regions of birth, maternal country of birth for the 6 most populous groups and parental migration status for the mother and second parent (UK-born/non-UK-born). We used Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) quintiles to indicate socioeconomic deprivation. We fitted negative binomial/Poisson regression models to model associations between parental migration groups and the risk of hospital admissions, including interactions with IMD group., Results: Overall, children whose parents were both born abroad had lower emergency admission rates than children with parents both born in the UK. Children of UK-born (73.6% of the cohort) mothers had the highest rates of emergency admissions (171.6 per 1000 child-years, 95% confidence interval (CI) 171.4-171.9), followed by South Asia-born mothers (155.9 per 1000, 95% CI 155.1-156.7). The high rates estimated in the South Asia group were driven by children of women born in Pakistan (186.8 per 1000, 95% CI 185.4-188.2). A socioeconomic gradient in emergency admissions was present across all maternal regions of birth groups, but most pronounced among children of UK-born mothers (incidence rate ratio 1.43, 95% CI 1.42-1.44, high vs. low IMD group). Patterns of planned admissions followed a similar socioeconomic gradient and were highest among children with mothers born in Middle East and North Africa, and South Asia., Conclusions: Overall, we found the highest emergency admission rates among children of UK-born parents from the most deprived backgrounds. However, patterns differed when decomposing maternal place of birth and admission reason, highlighting the importance of a nuanced approach to research on migration and health., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

There is a need for greater conceptual clarity in place-based initiatives that seek to give residents of disadvantaged neighbourhoods more control over action to address the social determinants of health inequalities at a local level. In this article, we address this issue as it relates to the concepts of participation and inclusion. We draw on qualitative data generated during the first phase of the Communities in Control Study, a longitudinal multisite independent evaluation of the impact of Big Local on the social determinants of health and health inequalities. Big Local is a resident-led area improvement initiative in England, funded by the UK Big Lottery Fund. Initiatives focused on community empowerment are increasingly prominent in public health policy and practice globally. Approaches emphasise the promotion of greater control over decisions and action among individuals, groups, and communities, particularly those living in disadvantaged circumstances. However, when it comes to participation and inclusion in taking action and making decisions, the field is characterised by conceptual confusion. This risks undermining the impact of these initiatives. While participation and inclusion are necessary conditions for empowerment and collective control, they are not necessarily sufficient. Sufficiency requires attention to the breadth of participation (i.e., to inclusion) and to the depth of participation (i.e., the extent to which it is experienced as empowering and ultimately enables the exercise of collective control over decisions and actions). In observing how different Big Local resident-led partnerships across England are tackling the day-to-day challenges of engaging with their communities, we reveal the potential for policy and practice of reframing, and therefore clarifying (to highlight the different roles they have) the concepts of participation and inclusion in terms of depth and breadth., (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Global migration from hepatitis B endemic countries poses a significant public health challenge in receiving low-prevalence countries. In the UK, Chinese migrants are a high risk group for hepatitis B. However, they are an underserved population that infrequently accesses healthcare. This study sought to increase understanding of the determinants of hepatitis B testing and healthcare access among migrants of Chinese ethnicity living in England., Methods: We sought to obtain and integrate insights from different key stakeholders in the system. We conducted six focus group discussions and 20 in-depth interviews with community members and patients identifying themselves as 'Chinese', and interviewed 21 clinicians and nine health service commissioners. Data were thematically analysed and findings were corroborated through two validation workshops., Results: Three thematic categories emerged: knowledge and awareness, visibility of the disease, and health service issues. Low disease knowledge and awareness levels among community members contributed to erroneous personal risk perception and suboptimal engagement with services. Limited clinician knowledge led to missed opportunities to test and inaccurate assessments of infection risks in Chinese patients. There was little social discourse and considerable stigma linked to the disease among some sub-sections of the Chinese population. A lack of visibility of the issue and the population within the health system meant that these health needs were not prioritised by clinicians or commissioners. Service accessibility was also affected by the lack of language support. Greater use of community outreach, consultation aids, 'cultural competency' training, and locally adapted testing protocols may help., Conclusions: Hepatitis B among migrants of Chinese ethnicity in England can be characterised as an invisible disease in an invisible population. Multi-modal solutions are needed to tackle barriers within this population and the health system.

In many welfare states, 'austerity' policies have ignited debates about the fairness and cost-effectiveness of universal welfare benefits, with benefits received by older citizens a particular topic of concern. Empirical studies suggest that conditionality generates problems of access and uptake but, to date, there has been little research on how different conditions of entitlement are understood by older citizens. This study drew on interviews with 29 older citizens from three areas of England to explore how eligibility for and uptake of different kinds of welfare benefits were understood. In interviews, current entitlement was understood in relation to a generational habitus, in which 'our generation' was framed as sharing cohort experiences, and moral orientations to self-reliance, hard work and struggle. Entitlement to some welfare benefits was taken for granted as a reward owed by the state to its citizens for hard-earned lives. State transfers such as pensions, free travel and fuel subsidies were congruent with a nationalised generational habitus, and fostered recognition, self-worth and the sense of a generation as a collective. In contrast, transfers contingent on economic or need-based conditionality were more explicitly framed as 'benefits', and negatively associated with vulnerability and moral contestation. Uptake was therefore often incompatible with their generational habitus. Calls for introducing further conditionality to benefits for older adults are often based on claims that this will increase fairness and equality. Our analysis suggests, however, that introducing conditionality has the potential to promote inequality and foster differentiation and division, within the older population and between generations., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)