Introduction: To describe the Danish National Health Service Register in relation to research. Content: The register contains data collected for administrative and scientific purposes from health contractors in primary health care. It includes information about citizens, providers, and health services but minimal clinical information. Validity and coverage: The register covers everyone living in Denmark and data is available from 1990. No validity studies have been reported. Because the data is connected to reimbursement the coverage is assumed to be good. Conclusion: The strengths of the register include completeness, size, and long follow-up period. It is useful for research purposes but reservations must be made regarding its validity.

BackgroundHealth services across Europe provide health care for migrant patients every day. However, little systematic research has explored the views and experiences of health care professionals in different European countries. The aim of this study was to assess the difficulties professionals experience in their service when providing such care and what they consider constitutes good practice to overcome these problems or limit their negative impact on the quality of care.MethodsStructured interviews with open questions and case vignettes were conducted with health care professionals working in areas with high proportion of migrant populations in 16 countries. In each country, professionals in nine primary care practices, three accident and emergency hospital departments, and three community mental health services (total sample = 240) were interviewed about their views and experiences in providing care for migrant patients, i.e. from first generation immigrant populations. Answers were analysed using thematic content analysis.ResultsEight types of problems and seven components of good practice were identified representing all statements in the interviews. The eight problems were: language barriers, difficulties in arranging care for migrants without health care coverage, social deprivation and traumatic experiences, lack of familiarity with the health care system, cultural differences, different understandings of illness and treatment, negative attitudes among staff and patients, and lack of access to medical history. The components of good practice to overcome these problems or limit their impact were: organisational flexibility with sufficient time and resources, good interpreting services, working with families and social services, cultural awareness of staff, educational programmes and information material for migrants, positive and stable relationships with staff, and clear guidelines on the care entitlements of different migrant groups. Problems and good care components were similar across the three types of services.ConclusionsHealth care professionals in different services experience similar difficulties when providing care to migrants. They also have relatively consistent views on what constitutes good practice. The degree to which these components already are part of routine practice varies. Implementing good practice requires sufficient resources and organisational flexibility, positive attitudes, training for staff and the provision of information.

Objectives Knowledge about self-perceived health can help us understand the health status and needs among migrants and ethnic minorities in the European Union (EU) which is essential to improve equity and integration. The objective was to examine and compare self-perceived health among migrant and ethnic minority groups in the EU countries. Methods Publications were ascertained by a systematic search of PUBMED and EMBASE. Eligibility of studies was based on the abstracts and the full texts. Additional articles were identified via the references. The final number of studies included was 17. Results Publications were identified in 5 out of the 27 EU countries. In regard to self-perceived health, most migrants and ethnic minority groups appeared to be disadvantaged as compared to the majority population even after controlling for age, gender, and socioeconomic factors. Only limited cross-country comparisons could be carried out, still they revealed a parallel pattern of self-perceived health among similar migrant/ethnic minority groups. Conclusions Policies to improve social and health status, contextual factors, and access to healthcare among migrants and ethnic minorities are essential to reduce ethnic inequalities in health.

Our review illustrates lack of appropriate epidemiological data and diversity in the categorization of migrants between studies, which makes valid cross-country comparisons most challenging. After adjusting for socio-economic factors and health status, the existing studies still show systematic variations in somatic healthcare utilization between migrants and non-migrants.

Health policies towards asylum seekers differ significantly between the EU countries and may result in the fact that the health needs of asylum seekers are not always adequately met.