Search

Aims: Adult non-Western immigrants in Scandinavia tend to be worse off in terms of health than native-born populations, which cannot be fully ascribed to their often lower socioeconomic status (SES). This review examines if differences in health status are also present between non-Western immigrant and majority children in Denmark, Norway and Sweden, and if SES explains the differences. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, relevant Scandinavian peer-reviewed quantitative publications since 1990 were identified through a systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science and SveMed. Of 1197 identified publications, 27 remained relevant after applying inclusion criteria: 3 Danish, 6 Norwegian and 18 Swedish studies. Results: Non-western immigrant children had overall poorer outcomes compared with ethnic majority children in Denmark, Norway and Sweden in health issues covered by the included studies: diabetes, obesity, oral and mental health, and well-being. However, in diabetes, obesity and mental health, non-Western immigrant children from certain countries and regions, and descendants of non-Western immigrants had similar/more favourable outcomes than majority children. In mental health and well-being, ethnic inequalities were strongly associated with SES, while for diabetes, obesity and oral health, differences remained significant after adjusting for SES. Conclusions: Overall poorer health outcomes in non-Western immigrant compared with majority children in Scandinavia cannot be fully explained by SES. Evidence points to additional mechanisms at individual, household, societal or policy levels, including reasons for migration, culture and societal discrimination. Finally, methodological issues may influence study outcomes, e.g. heterogeneity of populations studied and socioeconomic variables included.

Aims: Suboptimal healthcare utilisation and lower satisfaction with the patient-doctor encounter among immigrants has been documented. Immigrants' lack of familiarity with the healthcare system has been proposed as an explanation for this. This study investigated whether a systematic delivery of information affected immigrants' knowledge of and satisfaction with the Danish healthcare system., Methods: A prospective, randomised intervention study of 1158 adult immigrants attending two language schools in Copenhagen was conducted. Two intervention groups received written information or a 12-hour course on the Danish healthcare system, while a control group received nothing. Survey data included self-assessed knowledge, true/false questions on access and questions relating to satisfaction with the healthcare system. Data were linked to socioeconomic registry data. Logistic regression analyses were performed., Results: The course improved knowledge of who to contact in the event of an accident (odds ratio (OR) = 2.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.56-4.59) but not in the event of illness. Further, it positively affected correct answers for nine out of 11 questions on the healthcare system (varying from OR = 1.87, 95% CI = 1.08-3.24 to OR = 3.11, 95% CI = 1.58-6.11). Written information positively affected correct answers for three out of 11 questions, but negatively affected one out of 11 compared with the control group. Neither intervention affected immigrants' satisfaction with the healthcare system., Conclusions: Knowledge of the healthcare system is necessary for optimal healthcare-seeking behaviour. The results may form the basis of national and international changes in immigrant reception and optimise immigrants' contact with the healthcare system.

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.