Journal Article

Inequalities in access to healthcare by local policy model among newly arrived refugees: evidence from population-based studies in two German states

Gottlieb, Nora, Biddle, Louise, Bozorgmehr, Kayvan, Wenner, Judith

2022

Overview

Background Access to healthcare is restricted for newly arriving asylum seekers and refugees (ASR) in many receiving countries, which may lead to inequalities in health. In Germany, regular access and full entitlement to healthcare (equivalent to statutory health insurance, SHI) is only granted after a waiting time of 18 months. During this time of restricted entitlements, local authorities implement different access models to regulate asylum seekers’ access to healthcare: the electronic health card (EHC) or the healthcare voucher (HV). This paper examines inequalities in access to healthcare by comparing healthcare utilization by ASR under the terms of different local models (i.e., regular access equivalent to SHI, EHC, and HV). Methods We used data from three population-based, cross-sectional surveys among newly arrived ASR (N=863) and analyzed six outcome measures: specialist and general practitioner (GP) utilization, unmet needs for specialist and GP services, emergency department use and avoidable hospitalization. Using logistic regression, we calculated odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals for all outcome measures, while considering need by adjusting for socio-demographic characteristics and health-related covariates. Results Compared to ASR with regular access, ASR under the HV model showed lower needs-adjusted odds of specialist utilization (OR=0.41 [0.24-0.66]) while ASR under the EHC model did not differ from ASR with regular access in any of the outcomes. The comparison between EHC and HV model showed higher odds for specialist utilization under the EHC model as compared to the HV model (OR=2.39 [1.03-5.52]). GP and emergency department utilization, unmet needs and avoidable hospitalization did not show significant differences in any of the fully adjusted models. Conclusion ASR using the HV are disadvantaged in their access to healthcare compared to ASR having either an EHC or regular access. Given equal need, they use specialist services less. The identified inequalities constitute inequities in access to healthcare that could be reduced by policy change from HV to the EHC model during the initial 18 months waiting time, or by granting ASR regular healthcare access upon arrival. Potential patterns of differences in GP utilization, unmet needs, emergency department use and avoidable hospitalization between the models deserve further exploration in future studies.

• Publisher: BioMed Central,BioMed Central Ltd,Springer Nature B.V,BMC
• Subject: Access to healthcare / Allgemeine Bevölkerungsumfrage der Sozialwissenschaften ALLBUS 2018 (ZA5270) / Ambulatory care / Asylum seekers / avoidable hospitalization / Bundesrepublik Deutschland / Confidence intervals / Data collection / emergency department use / Emergency medical services / Equality and Human Rights / Equivalence / Health aspects / Health care / Health inequalities / Health insurance / Health Policy / Health Promotion and Disease Prevention / Health Services Research / Health services utilization / Healthcare utilization / Hospitalization / Inequalities / Medical care / Medicine / Medicine & Public Health / Patient admissions / Population studies / Population-based studies / Public Health / Refugees / Social Justice / Social Policy / Statistical analysis / Unmet needs / Utilization / Waiting period