Skip to main content

Digital Tools for Enhancing Infectious Disease Screening in Migrants

The European Centre for Disease Control (ECDC) has highlighted a stark reality: migrants in Europe are disproportionately affected by undiagnosed infections, including tuberculosis, blood-borne viruses, and parasitic infections. Many migrants also fall into the category of being under-immunised. The call to action is clear — innovative strategies must be developed to deliver integrated multi-disease screening within primary care settings. Despite this call, the United Kingdom's response remains fragmented. Our recent in-depth qualitative study published in the Journal of Migration and Health delves into the current practices, barriers, and potential solutions to this pressing public health issue.

Primary healthcare professionals from across the UK participated in two phases of this qualitative study through semi-structured telephone interviews. The first phase focused on clinical staff, including general practitioners, nurses, healthcare assistants, and pharmacists. The second phase targeted administrative staff, such as practice managers and receptionists. Through these interviews, a complex picture emerged, revealing a primary care system capable of effective screening but hamstrung by inconsistency and lack of standardized approaches. Many practices lack a systematic screening process, resulting in migrant patients not consistently receiving care based on established NICE/ECDC/UKHSA guidelines.

The barriers to effective infectious disease screening are multifaceted, stemming from patient, staff, and systemic levels. Clinicians and administrative staff pinpointed the stumbling blocks: overly complex care pathways, a lack of financial and expert support, and the need for significant administrative and clinical time investments. Solutions proposed by respondents include appointing infectious disease champions among patients and staff, providing targeted training and specialist support, simplifying care pathways, and introducing financial incentives.

Enter Health Catch-UP!., a collaboratively developed digital clinical decision-making tool designed to support multi-infection screening for migrant patients. The primary care professionals involved in the study responded enthusiastically to this digital innovation. They recognized its potential to systematize data integration and support clinical decision-making, thereby increasing knowledge, reducing missed screening opportunities, and normalizing infectious disease screening for migrants in primary care.

The conclusion is unequivocal: current implementation of infectious disease screening in migrant populations within UK primary care is suboptimal. Yet, there is hope. Digital tools like Health Catch-UP! could revolutionize disease detection and the effective implementation of screening guidance. However, for such digital innovations to succeed, they must be robustly tested and adequately resourced. It's not just about having the right tools but also ensuring the entire healthcare system is aligned to support their deployment. With the right commitment, we can ensure that migrants receive the care they need and deserve, safeguarding both their individual health as well as public health in the UK.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What is the difference between primordial prevention and primary prevention?

Primordial prevention and primary prevention are both crucial strategies for promoting health, but they operate at different levels. Primordial prevention aims to address the root causes of health problems and improve the wider determinants of health. It focuses on preventing the emergence of risk factors in the first place by tackling the underlying social, economic, and environmental determinants of health. This involves broad, population-wide interventions such as: Policies that promote healthy food choices: Think about initiatives like taxing sugary drinks to discourage unhealthy consumption, or providing subsidies for fruits and vegetables to make them more accessible. Urban planning that prioritises well-being: This could include creating walkable neighborhoods with safe cycling routes, ensuring access to green spaces for recreation and relaxation, and designing communities that foster social connections. Social programs that address inequality: Initiatives aimed at reducing pov...
Post a Comment
Read more

Relevance Over Recall: Rethinking How AI Uses Clinical Data

Our article in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine argues that safe and effective AI in healthcare must incorporate mechanisms that emulate human judgement - down-weighting old, inaccurate or superseded information and prioritising what is recent, clinically relevant and reaffirmed - so that AI supports, rather than disrupts, high-quality patient care.  Clinicians constantly revise, reinterpret and filter past information so that only what is relevant, accurate and timely shapes present-day management decisions; medical records function as dynamic “working tools” rather than fixed archives. By contrast, many AI systems lack this capacity for selective forgetting and often treat all historical data as equally meaningful.  This can lead to outdated or low-confidence diagnoses being repeatedly resurfaced, persistent labels influencing clinical expectations, and irrelevant, long-resolved events cluttering summaries and decision-support outputs. Such indiscriminate recall...
Post a Comment
Read more

What makes a good doctor – and who gets to decide?

What Makes a Good Doctor? This is the question that Waseem Jerjes and I explore in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine . It is a key question that underpins the architecture of medical education, clinical practice, regulation, and professional identity. It cannot be answered by regulators, educators, or employers in isolation. It must be answered together – by doctors and patients – revisited throughout a career, and adapted as society and the profession change. Without that shared reflection, the danger is not simply disillusionment, but the erosion of the moral foundations of clinical work. As we enter an era when diagnosis will increasingly involve artificial intelligence and when performance metrics reward volume over value, reclaiming this question as a professional one is imperative. The integrity of our institutions – and of the practitioners within them – depends on reimagining excellence in inclusive, relational terms. A good doctor is not a flawless technician or a f...
Post a Comment
Read more