No abstract

Background Over a two‐year period between 2015 and 2016, unprecedented numbers of people arrived in Greece fleeing conflict, persecution, and poverty. With new arrivals every day, there is a significant unmet need for health care provision, posing a challenge to the Greek Healthcare System. For pregnant refugees, a known vulnerable group, this has resulted in a complex partnership of shared maternity care between humanitarian organizations, the Greek national health care system, and European multi‐state initiatives. Our aim was to understand the challenges to providing maternity care services in Greek refugee camps as perceived by health care providers. Methods A qualitative study comprising observation and semi‐structured interviews with health care providers working with pregnant refugees was conducted in five refugee camps in May 2017. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed with thematic coding. Results Twenty‐one health care providers were interviewed and field notes taken from observational study of services in five refugee camps. Health care providers describe difficult cross‐cultural communication to be their biggest challenge to caring for pregnant refugee women. The limited availability of female only safe spaces is also identified as a barrier. Lastly, the overburdened Greek public health system limits their ability to provide care. Conclusions Our research supports other literature describing difficult communication and the overburdened Greek health system as significant health care barriers for pregnant refugees in Greece. There is limited literature examining the role of “safe space,” and further research is needed. Stakeholders providing maternity care to refugees should look to tackle these key issues as they seek to provide care to this population.

Background/introduction A large GUM clinic introduced a sexual assault pro forma to improve the management of patients alleging sexual assault. Aim(s)/objectives To compare standard of care of complainants of sexual assault with and without use of pro forma. Methods A retrospective review of patient records with evidence of first disclosure of sexual assault was undertaken for an eight month period. Data on 16 outcomes including 14 nationally auditable standards was analysed against use of the pro forma. Data analysis was performed using Stata. Data collection will be extended to twelve months. Results 65 patients were included. A pro forma was only completed in 58%. The following outcomes were significantly associated with pro forma use: HIV risk assessment (p = <0.001), detailed history of assault (p = <0.001), offer of hepatitis B vaccine (p = 0.03) and completion of self-harm assessment (p = <0.001). Other outcomes supporting pro forma use were risk assessment of vulnerability (p = <0.001) and offer of psychological support (p = <0.001). STI testing specifically for hepatitis C and trichomonas vaginalis was below the national auditable standard in both groups. Discussion/conclusion The use of a pro forma has improved clinical care of complainants of sexual assault. Poor uptake of use of the pro forma within the clinic needs to be addressed. Amendments to the pro forma may improve outcomes such as increasing offer of testing for hepatitis C and trichomonas vaginalis.

No abstract