Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39251939›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2024

"The police came in white protective suits and with batons, it was pure disaster" - a multi-stakeholder perspective on infection control in reception centers for asylum seekers during the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany.

Latife Pacolli-Tabaku, Amand Führer, Diana Wahidie, Ulrich Trohl, Yüce Yilmaz-Aslan, Patrick Brzoska

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Latife Pacolli-TabakuHealth Services Research Unit, Faculty of Health, School of Medicine, Witten/Herdecke University, Alfred-Herrhausen-Straße 50, 58448, Witten, Germany.
Amand FührerHealth Services Research Unit, Faculty of Health, School of Medicine, Witten/Herdecke University, Alfred-Herrhausen-Straße 50, 58448, Witten, Germany.
Diana WahidieHealth Services Research Unit, Faculty of Health, School of Medicine, Witten/Herdecke University, Alfred-Herrhausen-Straße 50, 58448, Witten, Germany.
Ulrich TrohlInstitute for Medical Epidemiology, Biometrics and Informatics (IMEBI), Interdisciplinary Center for Health Sciences, Medical School of the Martin Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, 06112, Halle, Germany.
Yüce Yilmaz-AslanHealth Services Research Unit, Faculty of Health, School of Medicine, Witten/Herdecke University, Alfred-Herrhausen-Straße 50, 58448, Witten, Germany.
Patrick BrzoskaHealth Services Research Unit, Faculty of Health, School of Medicine, Witten/Herdecke University, Alfred-Herrhausen-Straße 50, 58448, Witten, Germany. patrick.brzoska@uni-wh.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic presented unprecedented challenges, particularly for vulnerable populations residing in confined settings such as refugee shelters: Physical distancing measures were challenging to implement in shelters due to shared rooms or communal use of kitchens and sanitary facilities, which increased the risk of infections. Meanwhile, individuals' capabilities for individual protection strategies were severely impaired by the structure of the shelters. Consequently, shelters had the duty to develop and implement strategies for the prevention and handling of SARS-CoV-2 infections. The aim of this study was to explore the perspectives of refugees, NGO employees, and shelter directors regarding COVID-19-related measures in German refugee shelters. The study aimed to identify challenges and conflicts arising from implemented measures, as well as expectations for improved support during the pandemic.

methodsSemi-structured and narrative interviews were conducted with 6 refugees, 6 facility managers, 12 NGO staff, and 2 social service agency staff from February to August 2022. Qualitative content analysis was employed to analyze the data, identifying overarching themes and codes.

resultsThe study uncovered challenges and conflicts resulting from pandemic measures, particularly mass quarantine orders, within refugee shelters. Lack of transparency and ineffective communication worsened tensions, with refugees feeling distressed and anxious. The quarantine experience had a negative impact on refugees' mental health, which was exacerbated by limited social interaction and leisure-time activities. Shelter managers encountered administrative challenges when implementing measures due to facility constraints and limited resources, while NGO employees encountered obstacles in providing immediate assistance due to legal regulations and a lack of cooperation from shelter managers.

conclusionsThe study highlights that shelters are problematic institutions from a public health perspective. It shows the importance of implementing customized pandemic interventions in refugee shelters that take account of the diverse needs and experiences of both refugee and staff. To achieve this, we recommend to establish an ethics committee and involve various stakeholders in decision-making processes. Additionally, enhancing information dissemination to promote transparency and public understanding of measures is crucial. These insights can help develop comprehensive and effective pandemic plans for refugee shelters, ensuring better preparedness for future public health crises.

Indexed as

COVID-19Infection ControlRefugeesAdultFemaleGermanyHumansMaleMiddle AgedPandemicsPoliceQualitative ResearchSARS-CoV-2Stakeholder ParticipationCOVID-19COVID-19 impactGermanyMass quarantinePandemic measuresRefugeesRefugee shelters

Identifiers

PMID39251939
PMCPMC11382394

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.