Inequalities in COVID-19 severe morbidity and mortality by country of birth in Sweden

COVID-19 mortality among immigrants by duration of residence in Sweden: a population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Explanations for the disproportional COVID-19 burden among immigrants relative to host-country natives include differential exposure to the virus and susceptibility due to poor health conditions. Prior to the pandemic, immigrants displayed deteriorating health with duration of residence that may be associated with increased susceptibility over time. The aim of this study was to compare immigrant-native COVID-19 mortality by immigrants' duration of residence to examine the role of differential susceptibility.

METHODS

A population-based cohort study was conducted with individuals between 18 and 100 years old registered in Sweden between 1 January 2015 and 15 June 2022. Cox regression models were run to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Inequalities in COVID-19 mortality between immigrants and the Swedish-born population in the working-age group were concentrated among those of non-Western origins and from Finland with more than 15 years in Sweden, while for those of retirement age, these groups showed higher COVID-19 mortality HRs regardless of duration of residence. Both age groups of immigrants from Africa and the Middle East showed consistently higher COVID-19 mortality HRs. For the working-age population: Africa: HR<15: 2.46, 95%CI: 1.78, 3.38; HR≥15: 1.49, 95%CI: 1.01, 2.19; and from the Middle East: HR<15: 1.20, 95%CI: 0.90, 1.60; HR≥15: 1.65, 95%CI: 1.32, 2.05. For the retirement-age population: Africa: HR<15: 3.94, 95%CI: 2.85, 5.44; HR≥15: 1.66, 95%CI: 1.32, 2.09; Middle East: HR<15: 3.27, 95%CI: 2.70, 3.97; HR≥15: 2.12, 95%CI: 1.91, 2.34.

CONCLUSIONS

Differential exposure, as opposed to differential susceptibility, likely accounted for the higher COVID-19 mortality observed among those origins who were disproportionately affected by the pandemic in Sweden.

Norwegian "dugnad" as a rhetorical device in public health communication during the COVID-19 pandemic. A qualitative study from immigrant's perspectives

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Norwegian government appealed to the term "national dugnad" in the communication of containment measures as a call for collective action to fight the spread of infection. "Dugnad" is traditionally associated with solidarity, social responsibility, and a communal spirit in the form of volunteer work carried out by a local community. Although the word "dugnad" is difficult to translate to other languages, it was used as a rhetorical device by the government to communicate health-related information during the pandemic. This study aims to explore how immigrants understood and related to the term "dugnad" as used in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic in Norway.

METHODS

We conducted 55 semi-structured interviews in 2020 with immigrants from Poland (10), Syria (15), Somalia (10), Sri Lanka (10), and Chile (10). Interviews were conducted in participants' mother-tongues. We used systematic text condensation following Malterud's four steps to analyze the data.

RESULTS

The results are organized into three themes corresponding to: (1) meaning making of the term "dugnad"; (2) attitudes towards the term "dugnad"; and (3) reactions to the use of "dugnad" in a public health context. Overall, participants were familiar with the term "dugnad" and positively associated it with volunteering, unity, and a sense of community. However, we found a variety of reactions towards using this term in a public health context, ranging from agreement to disagreement and irritation.

CONCLUSION

Health communication during pandemics is crucial for maximizing compliance and gaining control of disease spread. In multicultural societies, governments and authorities should be aware of the linguistic and cultural barriers to public health communication if they are to effectively reach the entire population. The use of culturally specific concepts in this context, specially as rhetorical devices, may hinder effective health communication and increase health inequalities.

Inequalities in health outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection by migration status in Barcelona, Spain

Background

Migrants are a vulnerable population at risk of worse health outcomes due to legal status, language barriers, and socioeconomic and cultural factors. Considering the conflicting literature on the subject, it is important to further explore the extent and nature of these inequalities.

Objective

The aim of this study is to compare health outcomes associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection between Spanish native and migrant population living in Barcelona.

Methods

Observational retrospective cohort study including all adult cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection who visited a tertiary hospital in Barcelona between the 1st March 2020 and the 31st March 2022. We established the following five health outcomes: the presence of symptomatology, hospitalisation, intensive care unit admission, use of mechanical ventilation, and in-hospital 30-day mortality (IHM). Using Spanish natives as a reference, Odds Ratios (OR) with 95% confidence interval (95%CI) were calculated for migrants by multivariate logistic regression and adjusted by sociodemographic and clinical factors.

Results

Of 11,589 patients (46.8% females), 3,914 were born outside of Spain, although 34.8% of them had legal citizenship. Most migrants were born in the Americas Region (20.3%), followed by other countries in Europe (17.2%). Migrants were younger than natives (median 43 [IQR 33-55] years vs. 65 [49-78] years) and had a higher socioeconomic privation index, less comorbidities, and fewer vaccine doses. Adjusted models showed migrants were more likely to report SARS-CoV-2 symptomatology with an adjusted OR of 1.36 (95%CI 1.20-1.54), and more likely to be hospitalised (OR 1.11 [IC95% 1.00-1.23], p < 0.05), but less likely to experience IHM (OR 0.67 [IC95% 0.47-0.93], p < 0.05).

Conclusion

Characteristics of migrant and native population differ greatly, which could be translated into different needs and health priorities. Native population had higher odds of IHM, but migrants were more likely to present to care symptomatic and to be hospitalised. This could suggest disparities in healthcare access for migrant population. More research on health disparities beyond SARS-CoV-2 in migrant populations is necessary to identify gaps in healthcare access and health literacy.