Search

Studies from several countries have shown that the COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionally affected migrants. Many have numerous risk factors making them vulnerable to infection and poor clinical outcome. Policies to mitigate this effect need to take into account public health principles of inclusion, universal health coverage and the right to health. In addition, the migrant health agenda has been compromised by the suspension of asylum processes and resettlement, border closures, increased deportations and lockdown of camps and excessively restrictive public health measures. International organizations including the World Health Organization and the World Bank have recommended measures to actively counter racism, xenophobia and discrimination by systemically including migrants in the COVID-19 pandemic response. Such recommendations include issuing additional support, targeted communication and reducing barriers to accessing health services and information. Some countries have had specific policies and outreach to migrant groups, including facilitating vaccination. Measures and policies targeting migrants should be evaluated, and good models disseminated widely.

BackgroundCOVID-19 has led to big changes in UK primary care, including rapid digitalisation, with unknown impact on migrant groups.AimTo understand the pandemic’s impact on recently-arrived migrants and their access to primary health care, and implications for vaccine roll-out.Design and settingQualitative study involving semi-structured interviews with primary care professionals (PCPs) and migrants in urban, suburban, and rural settings across England.MethodSixty-four PCPs and administrative staff, and 17 recently-arrived migrants were recruited using purposive, convenience, and snowball sampling. In-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted by telephone. Data were analysed iteratively, informed by thematic analysis.ResultsPCPs and migrants concurred that digitalisation and virtual consultations have amplified existing inequalities in access to health care for many migrants, due to a lack of digital literacy and access to technology, compounded by language barriers. PCPs were concerned that virtual consultations resulted in difficulties building trust and risked missing safeguarding cues. Both PCPs and migrants highlighted challenges around registering and accessing health care due to physical closure of surgeries, as well as indirect discrimination, language and communication barriers, and a lack of access to targeted and tailored COVID-19 information or interventions. Migrants reported a range of specific beliefs, from acceptance to mistrust, around COVID-19 and potential COVID-19 vaccines, often influenced by misinformation. Innovative opportunities were suggested, including translated digital health advice using text templates and YouTube; these merit further exploration.ConclusionPandemic-related changes to primary care delivery may become permanent; some migrant groups are at risk of digital exclusion and may need targeted additional support to access services. Solutions are needed to address vaccine hesitancy in marginalised groups to ensure equitable COVID-19 vaccine uptake.

ObjectivesTuberculosis (TB) and mental illnesses are highly prevalent globally and often coexist. While poor mental health is known to modulate immune function, whether mental disorders play a causal role in TB incidence is unknown. This systematic review examines the association between mental health and TB disease risk to inform clinical and public health measures.DesignSystematic review, following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.Search strategy and selection criteriaMEDLINE, PsycINFO and PsycEXTRA databases were searched alongside reference list and citation searching. Inclusion criteria were original research studies published 1 January 1970–11 May 2020 reporting data on the association between mental health and TB risk.Data extraction, appraisal and synthesisData were extracted on study design and setting, sample characteristics, measurement of mental illness and TB, and outcomes including effect size or prevalence. Studies were critically appraised using Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) and Appraisal Tool for Cross-Sectional Studies (AXIS) checklists.Results1546 records published over 50 years were screened, resulting in 10 studies included reporting data from 607 184 individuals. Studies span across Asia, South America and Africa, and include mood and psychotic disorders. There is robust evidence from cohort studies in Asia demonstrating that depression and schizophrenia can increase risk of active TB, with effect estimates ranging from HR=1.15 (95% CI 1.03 to 1.28) to 2.63 (95% CI 1.74 to 3.96) for depression and HR=1.52 (95% CI 1.29 to 1.79) to RR=3.04 for schizophrenia. These data align with evidence from cross-sectional studies, for example, a large survey across low-income and middle-income countries (n=242 952) reports OR=3.68 (95% CI 3.01 to 4.50) for a depressive episode in those with TB symptoms versus those without.ConclusionsIndividuals with mental illnesses including depression and schizophrenia experience increased TB incidence and represent a high-risk population to target for screening and treatment. Integrated care for mental health and TB is needed, and interventions tackling mental illnesses and underlying drivers may help reduce TB incidence globally.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019158071.

SummaryBackgroundLatent Tuberculosis (LTBI) is one of the most prevalent infections globally and is key in development of active tuberculosis disease (TB). In many low-burden countries, LTBI is concentrated within migrant populations reflecting higher disease burden in some countries of origin; national programmes may consequently focus on screening and treating LTBI in migrants to prevent future TB cases. However, little is known about the extent to which migrants initiate treatment for LTBI when testing positive, and their treatment outcomes, which is urgently needed if we are to strengthen these programmes, improve migrant health, and meet TB elimination targets.MethodsWe did a systematic review and meta-analysis, following PRISMA guidelines and PROSPERO registered (CRD42019140338) to pool global data on LTBI initiation and completion amongst migrants (defined as foreign born), and secondary outcomes to explore the range of both personal and provider level factors associated with initiation and completion. We searched Embase, Medline and Global Health, and hand-searched grey literature (from Jan 1 2000 to Apr 21 2020). Inclusion criteria were primary research articles reporting on LTBI treatment initiation and/or completion amongst migrants; we excluded papers where data were not stratified by migrant status, or where the data related to outcomes prior to the year 2000. There were no geographical or language restrictions.Results39 publications were included from 13 countries, with treatment initiation and completion data for 31,598 LTBI positive migrants. Overall, 69% (95% CI⍰=⍰51–84%; I2⍰=⍰99.62%) of these initiated treatment; 74% (95% CI⍰=⍰66–81%; I2⍰=⍰99.19%) of migrants who initiated treatment, completed it; among studies with data on the complete pathway from screening positive to completing treatment, 52% (95% CI⍰=⍰40–64%; I2⍰=⍰98.90%) successfully completed treatment. Meta-regression showed that LTBI programmes are improving, with more recent reported data (2010-2020) associated with better rates of treatment initiation and completion. European studies also appeared to have more successful outcomes than those in the Americas and Western Pacific WHO regions.ConclusionsLTBI treatment initiation and completion amongst migrants have room for improvement. Though the data show improvements in the past decade, the delivery of these programmes will need further strengthening if we are to meet targets to eradicate TB in low-incidence countries. Greater focus will need to be placed on engaging migrants more effectively in the clinic and understanding the diverse barriers and facilitators to migrants initiating and completing treatment. Such efforts must be mindful of, and sensitive to the unique experiences individuals arriving in a new country.FundingThis study was funded by the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) through a joint ESCMID Study Group for Infections in Travellers and Migrants (ESGITM) and ESCMID Study Group for Mycobacterial Infections (ESGMYC) Study Group Research grant, the Rosetrees Trust (PhD studentship grant M775), the NIHR (NIHR Advanced Fellowship NIHR300072), and the Academy of Medical Sciences (SBF005\1111).Panel: Research in ContextEvidence before this studyLatent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) is one of the most prevalent infections globally, affecting an estimated 25% of the population; re-activation of LTBI is a major driver of tuberculosis (TB) cases worldwide. In low-incidence TB countries, TB and LTBI are often disproportionately concentrated amongst foreign born individuals, with national programmes increasingly focusing on the diagnosis and treatment of LTBI in migrants and other high-risk groups to prevent future TB cases and meet global elimination targets. However, little is known about the success of these programmes in engaging migrants and ensuring treatment completion – a population who often face multiple barriers to accessing health care on arrival to the host country. Prior to this review we scoped the literature and found two relevant reviews on this topic (Sandgren et al., 2016 & Alsdurf et al., 2016) but which did not specifically focus on migrants and/or lacked formal meta-analyses, and one/both used earlier data pre 2000 that may be less relevant now to current policy. Other studies have reported on migrant-specific outcomes in LTBI programmes globally, but the focus is often on screening practices rather than outcomes and all evidence in this area has not yet been effectively consolidated.Added value of this studyThis is the first systematic review and meta-analysis specifically exploring LTBI treatment initiation and completion among migrant populations. We report LTBI treatment outcome data on 31,598 migrants from the year 2000 onwards within 13 low-incidence countries (Implications of all the available evidenceDelivery of LTBI programmes will need to be strengthened to improve outcomes in migrants and meet targets to eradicate TB in low-incidence countries. Greater focus will need to be placed on engaging migrants more effectively in the clinic, understanding the varied reasons for migrants’ declining treatment when testing positive, and ensuring treatment adherence using innovative approaches that are mindful of and sensitive to the unique experiences of this group on arrival to the host country.

Diverse migrant populations in Europe are at risk of under-immunisation and have recently shown lower levels of COVID-19 vaccination intent and uptake. Understanding the determinants of vaccine uptake in migrants is critical to address immediate COVID-19 vaccination inequities, and longer-term will help improve coverage for routine vaccinations, aligning with the goals of the new Immunisation Agenda 2030. We did a systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and using a PICOS framework (PROSPERO CRD42020219214; MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO databases, 1 January 2000 – 14 September 2021) exploring barriers and facilitators to vaccine uptake and determinants of under-vaccination in migrants in the EU/EEA, UK, and Switzerland. We categorised barriers/facilitators using the ‘5As’ Determinants of Vaccine Uptake Taxonomy. 5259 data sources were screened, with 67 studies included from 16 countries, representing 366,529 migrants. Access barriers were most commonly reported (language, literacy and communication barriers; practical and legal barriers to accessing/delivering vaccination services; service barriers, including lack of specific guidelines and knowledge of healthcare professionals) for key vaccines including MMR, DTP, HPV, influenza, polio, COVID-19 vaccines. Acceptance barriers were mostly reported in Eastern European and Muslim communities for HPV, measles, and influenza vaccines. We identified 23 determinants of under-vaccination in migrants, including geographical origin (where 25/26 (96%) studies showed significance) – particularly African/Eastern European origin; recent migration; being a refugee/asylum seeker; higher income; parental education level; no healthcare contact in the past year; and lower language skills. Facilitators of migrants’ vaccine uptake included tailored vaccination messaging, community outreach and ‘nudging’ interventions. Migrants’ barriers to accessing healthcare are already well documented, and this review confirms their role in limiting vaccine uptake. These data hold immediate relevance to strengthening vaccination programmes in high-income countries, including for COVID-19. Our findings suggested that targeted, evidence-informed strategies are needed to address access and acceptance barriers to vaccination in migrants, including the development of migrant-sensitive and adaptable vaccination services and systems, unambiguous public health messaging, and coproduction of tailored interventions.

ObjectiveAnalysis of participatory approaches to developing health interventions for migrants and how approaches embody core participatory principles of inclusivity and democracy.DesignA systematic review of original articles. Electronic searches within the databases MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health and PsychINFO (from inception—November 2020).Eligibility criteria for study selectionOriginal peer-reviewed articles reporting research to develop and implement a health intervention for migrants, incorporating participatory approaches. We defined migrants as foreign-born individuals. Only articles reporting the full research cycle (inception, design, implementation, analysis, evaluation, dissemination) were included.Data extractionWe extracted information related to who was involved in research (migrants or other non-academic stakeholders), the research stage at which they were involved (inception, design, implementation, analysis, evaluation, dissemination), the method of their involvement and how this aligned with the core principles of participatory research—categorising studies as exhibiting active or pseudo (including proxy and indirect) participation.Results1793 publications were screened, of which 28 were included in our analysis. We found substantial variation in the application of participatory approaches in designing health interventions targeting migrants: across 168 individual research stages analysed across the 28 studies, we recorded 46 instances of active participation of migrants, 30 instances of proxy participation and 24 instances of indirect participation. All studies involved non-academic stakeholders in at least one stage of the research, only two studies exhibited evidence of active participation of migrants across all research stages. Evidence is limited due to the variability of terms and approaches used.ConclusionsImportant shortfalls in the meaningful inclusion of migrants in developing health interventions exist, suggesting a more rigorous and standardised approach is warranted to better define and deliver participatory research and improve quality.RegistrationThis review followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines and is registered on the Open Science Framework (osf.io/2bnz5).

Background Migrants in high-income countries (HICs) may have been disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, yet the extent to which they are impacted, and their predisposing risk factors, are not clearly understood. We did a systematic review to assess clinical outcomes, indirect health and social impacts, and key risk factors in migrants. Methods Our systematic review following PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO CRD42020222135) identified peer-reviewed and grey literature relating to migrants (foreign-born) and COVID-19 in 82 HICs. Primary outcomes were cases, hospitalisations and deaths from COVID-19 involving migrants; secondary outcomes were indirect health and social impacts and risk factors. Results 3016 data sources were screened with 158 from 15 countries included in the analysis. We found migrants are at increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and are over-represented among cases (e.g. constituting 42% of cases in Norway [to 27/4/2020], 26% in Denmark [to 7/9/2020], and 32% in Sweden [to 7/5/2020]); some datasets from Europe show migrants may be over-represented in deaths with increased all-cause mortality in migrants in some countries in 2020. Undocumented migrants, migrant health and care workers, and migrants housed in camps have been especially affected, with certain nationality groups disproportionately impacted. Migrants experience a range of risk factors for COVID-19, including high-risk occupations, overcrowded accommodation, and barriers to healthcare including inadequate information, language barriers, and reduced entitlement. Conclusions Migrants in HICs are at high risk of COVID-19, with a range of specific risk factors that have not been well-considered in the public health response to date. These data are of immediate relevance to the policy response to the pandemic, with strategies urgently needed to reduce transmission. Migrant populations must also be better considered in national plans for COVID-19 vaccination roll-out. On behalf of ESGITM Key messages Migrants in high-income countries may be disproportionately represented in COVID-19 infections and deaths, with higher levels of many vulnerabilities and risk factors. Migrants must be better included in all aspects of the pandemic response, including vaccination roll-out.

Some migrant populations in European countries face a disproportionate burden of infections (tuberculosis, latent tuberculosis, HIV, hepatitis, parasitic infection) and be under-immunised. Reducing the burden of infection is a key regional priority, yet there are major shortfalls in current practice, and a need for novel approaches. The ECDC has recently called for innovative implementation strategies within primary care, to look beyond single disease programmes, and to encompass a wider group of at-risk migrants. In this workshop we will explore some recent developments, including the use of novel digital tools to guide clinical decision making in primary care, and new approaches to latent TB screening. New approaches are urgently needed to strengthen screening and vaccination programmes and support routine data collection. We will seek audience participation in sharing models of best practice from across Europe and better defining innovative implementation approaches to improve screening and vaccine coverage in migrant populations, and review successes and challenges. The workshop will start with 15 minute presentations by each of the 3 speakers (to include a short Q&A after each talk). This will then move into a 15 minute audience discussion centred around seeking specific feedback on examples of innovation, good practice, and lessons learned across EU/EEA countries in approaches to strengthening uptake of screening and catch-up vaccination in migrant populations. Key messages There is a need to better define more effective strategies in primary care to strengthen screening for infection and improve vaccine coverage in migrant populations Digital tools and other approaches have been developed that can facilitate timely identification of key infections, that could contribute to improving health outcomes

Supplemental Digital Content is Available in the Text., Background: There have been a range of quality improvement (QI) and quality assurance initiatives in low- and middle-income countries to improve antiretroviral therapy (ART) treatment outcomes for people living with HIV. To date, these initiatives have not been systematically assessed and little is known about how effective, cost-effective, or sustainable these strategies are in improving clinical outcomes. Methods: We conducted a systematic review adhering to PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO ID: CRD42017071848), searching PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane database of controlled trials for articles reporting on the effectiveness of QI and quality assurance initiatives in HIV programs in low- and middle-income countries in relation to ART uptake, retention in care, adherence, viral load suppression, mortality, and other outcomes including cost-effectiveness and long-term sustainability. Results: One thousand eight hundred sixty articles were found, of which 29 were included. QI approaches were categorized as follows: (1) health system approaches using QI methods; (2) QI learning networks including collaboratives; (3) standard-based methods that use QI tools to improve performance gaps; and (4) campaigns using QI methods. The greatest improvements were seen in ART uptake [median increase of 14.0%; interquartile range (IQR) −9.0 to 29.3], adherence [median increase of 22.0% (IQR −7.0 to 25.0)], and viral load suppression [median increase 26.0% (IQR −8.0 to 26.0)]. Conclusions: QI interventions can be effective in improving clinical outcomes; however, there was significant variability, making it challenging to identify which aspects of interventions lead to clinical improvements. Standardizing reporting and assessment of QI initiatives is needed, supported by national quality policies and directorates, and robust research.

Background: Migrants globally, including refugees and asylum seekers, have experienced adverse clinical and socioeconomic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. For approximately 56,000 refugees and asylum seekers in Reception and Identification Centers (RICs) and Reception Sites (RS) in Greece, living in severely substandard living conditions, prevention measures have been impossible with limited provision in terms of routine testing, surveillance, and access to healthcare. These migrant populations have experienced prolonged lockdowns and restricted movement since the pandemic began. We aimed to assess the impact of COVID-19 on refugees and asylum seekers in reception facilities in Greece and explore implications for policy and practice. Methods: A retrospective analysis of policy documents and national surveillance data was conducted to identify COVID-19 outbreaks and estimate incidence among asylum seekers and refugees residing in these camps during the first 9 months of the epidemic in Greece (26th February – 15th November 2020). Incidence proportion (IP) of COVID-19 confirmed cases was calculated for three population groups (refugees and asylum seekers in RICs, refugees and asylum seekers in RSs, and the general population in Greece) during three time periods (first wave, second wave, and overall across the 9-month period). Findings: Twenty-five COVID-19 outbreaks were identified in refugee and asylum seeker reception facilities, with 6 (85.7%) of 7 RICs and 18 (56.3%) of 32 RSs reporting at least one outbreak during the study period. The overall 9-month COVID-19 IP among refugee and asylum seeker populations residing in RSs on the Greek mainland was 1758 cases per 100,000 population; in RICs the incidence was 2052 cases per 100,000 population. Compared to the general population the risk of COVID-19 infection among refugees and asylum seekers in reception facilities was 2.5 to 3 times higher (p-value

As COVID-19 vaccine roll-out begins in the MENA region, ensuring that migrant populations have equitable access to the vaccine, designing innovative and specific mechanisms for vaccine roll-out in these areas and monitoring vaccine uptake in migrant groups are now imminent challenges.

We conducted a serosurvey in 2020, amongst 149 adult migrants living in the United Kingdom, to determine seroprotection rates for measles, varicella zoster, and rubella. Findings suggest a gap in seroprotection against measles (89.3%). Younger migrants and those from Europe and Central Asia may be more susceptible; self-reported vaccine/disease status is a poor predictor of seroprotection. Understanding factors associated with seroprotection among migrants is critical for informing the delivery of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine.

Background: There are major shortfalls in the identification and screening of at-risk migrant groups. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of a new digital tool (IS-MiHealth) integrated into the electronic patient record system of primary care centres in detecting prevalent migrant infections. IS-MiHealth provides targeted recommendations to health professionals for screening multiple infections, including HIV, hepatitis B and C, active tuberculosis, Chagas disease, strongyloidiasis, and schistosomiasis, based on patient characteristics (including variables of country of origin, age, sex). Methods: A pragmatic pilot cluster-randomised controlled trial was deployed from March to December 2018. Eight primary care centres in Catalonia, Spain, were randomly allocated 1:1 to use of the digital tool for screening, or to routine care. The primary outcome was the monthly diagnostic yield of all aggregated infections. Intervention and control sites were compared before and after implementation with respect to their monthly diagnostic yield using regression models. This study is registered on ISRCTN (ISRCTN14795012). Results: 15780 migrants registered across the 8 centres had at least one visit during the intervention period (March to December 2018), of which 14 598 (92.51%) fulfilled the criteria to be screened for at least one infection. There were 210 (2.57%) individuals from the intervention group with new diagnoses compared with 113 (1.49%) from the control group (OR:2.08 95%CI 1.63–2.64, p Conclusions: The IS-MiHealth increased screening rate and diagnostic yield for key infections in migrants in a population-based primary care setting. Further testing and development of this new tool is warranted in larger trials and in other countries.

Background: Migrants in high-income countries may be at increased risk of COVID-19 due to their health and social circumstances, yet the extent to which they are affected and their predisposing risk factors are not clearly understood. We did a systematic review to assess clinical outcomes of COVID-19 in migrant populations, indirect health and social impacts, and to determine key risk factors.; Methods: We did a systematic review following PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO CRD42020222135). We searched multiple databases to 18/11/2020 for peer-reviewed and grey literature on migrants (foreign-born) and COVID-19 in 82 high-income countries. We used our international networks to source national datasets and grey literature. Data were extracted on primary outcomes (cases, hospitalisations, deaths) and we evaluated secondary outcomes on indirect health and social impacts and risk factors using narrative synthesis.; Results: 3016 data sources were screened with 158 from 15 countries included in the analysis (35 data sources for primary outcomes: cases [21], hospitalisations [4]; deaths [15]; 123 for secondary outcomes). We found that migrants are at increased risk of infection and are disproportionately represented among COVID-19 cases. Available datasets suggest a similarly disproportionate representation of migrants in reported COVID-19 deaths, as well as increased all-cause mortality in migrants in some countries in 2020. Undocumented migrants, migrant health and care workers, and migrants housed in camps have been especially affected. Migrants experience risk factors including high-risk occupations, overcrowded accommodation, and barriers to healthcare including inadequate information, language barriers, and reduced entitlement.; Conclusions: Migrants in high-income countries are at high risk of exposure to, and infection with, COVID-19. These data are of immediate relevance to national public health and policy responses to the pandemic. Robust data on testing uptake and clinical outcomes in migrants, and barriers and facilitators to COVID-19 vaccination, are urgently needed, alongside strengthening engagement with diverse migrant groups. © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.

IntroductionEarly evidence confirms lower COVID-19 vaccine uptake in established ethnic minority populations, yet there has been little focus on understanding vaccine hesitancy and barriers to vaccination in migrants. Growing populations of precarious migrants (including undocumented migrants, asylum seekers and refugees) in the UK and Europe are considered to be under-immunised groups and may be excluded from health systems, yet little is known about their views on COVID-19 vaccines specifically, which are essential to identify key solutions and action points to strengthen vaccine roll-out.MethodsWe did an in-depth semi-structured qualitative interview study of recently arrived migrants (foreign-born, >18 years old; ResultsWe approached 20 migrant support groups nationwide, recruiting 32 migrants (mean age 37.1 years; 21 [66%] female; mean time in the UK 5.6 years [SD 3.7 years]), including refugees (n = 3), asylum seekers (n = 19), undocumented migrants (n = 8) and migrants with limited leave to remain (n = 2) from 15 different countries (5 WHO regions). 23 (72%) of 32 migrants reported being hesitant about accepting a COVID-19 vaccine and communicated concerns over vaccine content, side-effects, lack of accessible information in an appropriate language, lack of trust in the health system and low perceived need. Participants reported a range of barriers to accessing the COVID-19 vaccine and expressed concerns that their communities would be excluded from or de-prioritised in the roll-out. Undocumented migrants described fears over being charged and facing immigration checks if they present for a vaccine. All participants (n = 10) interviewed after recent government announcements that COVID-19 vaccines can be accessed without facing immigration checks remained unaware of this. Participants stated that convenience of access would be a key factor in their decision around whether to accept a vaccine and proposed alternative access points to primary care services (for example, walk-in centres in trusted places such as foodbanks, community centres and charities), alongside promoting registration with primary care for all, and working closely with communities to produce accessible information on COVID-19 vaccination.ConclusionsPrecarious migrants may be hesitant about accepting a COVID-19 vaccine and face multiple and unique barriers to access, requiring simple but innovative solutions to ensure equitable access and uptake. Vaccine hesitancy and low awareness around entitlement and relevant access points could be easily addressed with clear, accessible, and tailored information campaigns, co-produced and delivered by trusted sources within marginalised migrant communities. These findings have immediate relevance to the COVID-19 vaccination initiatives in the UK and in other European and high-income countries with diverse migrant populations.FundingNIHR

We aimed to explore factors for optimizing antimicrobial treatment in emergency departments. A single-day point prevalence survey was conducted on January 18, 2020, in 53 referral/tertiary hospitals in 22 countries. 1957 (17%) of 11557 patients presenting to EDs had infections. The mean qSOFA score was 0.37 +/- 0.74. Sepsis (qSOFA >= 2) was recorded in 218 (11.1%) patients. The mean qSOFA score was significantly higher in low-middle (1.48 +/- 0.963) compared to upper-middle (0.17 +/- 0.482) and high-income (0.36 +/- 0.714) countries ( P < 0.001). Eight (3.7%) patients with sepsis were treated as outpatients. The most common diagnoses were upper-respiratory (n = 877, 43.3%), lower-respiratory (n = 316, 16.1%), and lower-urinary (n = 201, 10.3%) infections. 1085 (55.4%) patients received antibiotics. The most-commonly used antibiotics were beta-lactam (BL) and BL inhibitors (n = 307, 15.7%), third-generation cephalosporins (n = 251, 12.8%), and quinolones (n = 204, 10.5%). Irrational antibiotic use and inappropriate hospitalization decisions seemed possible. Patients were more septic in countries with limited resources. Hence, a better organizational scheme is required.

BackgroundMigrant populations (defined as foreign-born) are one of several under-immunised groups in the EU/EEA, yet little is known about how they are affected by outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs). This information is vital to develop targeted strategies to improve the health of diverse migrant communities and to assess risk factors and correlations with major European peaks in incidence of key VPDs over time.MethodsWe did a systematic review (PROSPERO CRD42019157473; Medline, EMBASE, and Global Health January 2000 to October 2019) adhering to PRISMA guidelines, to identify studies on VPD outbreaks (measles, mumps, rubella, diphtheria, pertussis, polio, hepatitis A,N meningitidis, andH influenzae) in migrants residing in the EU/EEA and Switzerland.Results45 studies were included, reporting on 47 distinct VPD outbreaks across 13 countries (26 [55%] were reported between 2010 and 2020, including 16 [34%] since 2015). Most reported outbreaks involving migrants were of measles (n=24; 6578 total cases), followed by varicella (n=11; 596 cases), hepatitis A (n=7; 1510 cases), rubella (n=3; 487 cases) and mumps (n=2; 295 cases). 19 (40%) of outbreaks, predominantly varicella and measles, were reported in temporary camps or shelters for asylum seekers and refugees. Of 11 varicella outbreaks, 82% were associated with adult migrants. Half of measles outbreaks (n=12) were associated with migrants from Eastern European countries, often involving migrants of Roma ethnicity.ConclusionsMigrants represent one of several under-immunised groups involved in VPD outbreaks in Europe, with adult and child refugees and asylum seekers residing in shelters or temporary camps at particular risk, alongside specific nationality groups. Vulnerability varies by disease, setting, and individual demographics, highlighting the importance of tailoring strategies for implementing catch-up vaccination to specific groups, alongside the strengthening of routine data collection, in order to meet regional and global vaccination targets. Better understanding vaccine uptake and demand issues in migrant groups, and reducing the barriers they face to accessing vaccination services, is urgently needed, with direct implications for COVID-19 vaccine delivery at the current time. Strengthening vaccine delivery to migrant populations will require a greater focus on co-designing vaccine uptake strategies in close collaboration with affected communities.FunderNIHR

Migrant populations are one of several underimmunised groups in the EU or European Economic Area (EU/EEA), yet little is known about their involvement in outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases. This information is vital to develop targeted strategies to improve the health of diverse migrant communities. We did a systematic review (PROSPERO CRD42019157473; Jan 1, 2000, to May 22, 2020) adhering to PRISMA guidelines, to identify studies on vaccine-preventable disease outbreaks (measles, mumps, rubella, diphtheria, pertussis, polio, hepatitis A, varicella, Neisseria meningitidis, and Haemophilus influenzae) involving migrants residing in the EU/EEA and Switzerland. We identified 45 studies, reporting on 47 distinct vaccine-preventable disease outbreaks across 13 countries. Most reported outbreaks involving migrants were of measles (n=24; 6496 cases), followed by varicella (n=11; 505 cases), hepatitis A (n=7; 1356 cases), rubella (n=3; 487 cases), and mumps (n=2; 293 cases). 19 (40%) outbreaks, predominantly varicella and measles, were reported in temporary refugee camps or shelters. Of 11 varicella outbreaks, nine (82%) were associated with adult migrants. Half of measles outbreaks (n=11) were associated with migrants from eastern European countries. In conclusion, migrants are involved in vaccine-preventable disease outbreaks in Europe, with adult and child refugees residing in shelters or temporary camps at particular risk, alongside specific nationality groups. Vulnerability varies by disease, setting, and demographics, highlighting the importance of tailoring catch-up vaccination interventions to specific groups in order to meet regional and global vaccination targets as recommended by the new Immunisation Agenda 2030 framework for action. A better understanding of vaccine access and intent in migrant groups and a greater focus on co-designing interventions is urgently needed, with direct implications for COVID-19 vaccine delivery.

Migration to the European Union (EU)/European Economic Area (EEA) affects the epidemiology of infectious diseases, including tuberculosis (TB), HIV, hepatitis B/C, and parasitic diseases. Some sub-populations of migrants are also considered to be an under-immunised group and thus at risk of vaccine-preventable diseases. Providing high-risk migrants access to timely and efficacious screening and vaccination, and understanding how best to implement more integrated screening and vaccination programmes into European health systems ensuring linkage to care and treatment, is key to improving the health of migrants and their communities, alongside meeting national and regional targets for infection surveillance, control, and elimination. The European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) has responded to calls to action to improve migrant health and strengthen universal health coverage by developing evidence-based guidance for policy makers, public health experts, and front-line healthcare professionals on how to approach screening and vaccination in newly arrived migrants within the EU/EEA. In this Commentary, we provide a perspective towards developing efficacious screening and vaccination of newly arrived migrants, with a focus on defining implementation challenges and evidence gaps in high-migrant receiving EU/EEA countries. There is a need now to leverage the increasing momentum around migrant health to both strengthen the evidence-base and to advocate for universal access to health care for all migrants in the EU/ EEA, including undocumented migrants. This should include voluntary, confidential, and non-stigmatising screening and vaccination that should be free of charge and facilitate linkage to appropriate care and treatment.

Objective We aimed to explore anxiety status across a broad range of HCWs supporting patients with COVID-19 in different global regions. Method This was an international online survey in which participation was on voluntary basis and data were submitted via Google Drive, across a two-week period starting from March 18, 2020. The Beck Anxiety Inventory was used to quantify the level of anxiety. Results 1416 HCWs (70.8% medical doctors, 26.2% nurses) responded to the survey from 75 countries. The distribution of anxiety levels was: normal/minimal (n = 503, 35.5%), low (n = 390, 27.5%); moderate (n = 287, 20.3%), and severe (n = 236, 16.7%). According to multiple generalized linear model, female gender (p = 0.001), occupation (ie, being a nurse dealing directly with patients with COVID-19 [p = 0.017]), being younger (p = 0.001), reporting inadequate knowledge on COVID-19 (p = 0.005), having insufficient personal protective equipment (p = 0.001) and poor access to hand sanitizers or liquid soaps (p = 0.008), coexisting chronic disorders (p = 0.001) and existing mental health problems (p = 0.001), and higher income of countries where HCWs lived (p = 0.048) were significantly associated with increased anxiety. Conclusions Front-line HCWs, regardless of the levels of COVID-19 transmission in their country, are anxious when they do not feel protected. Our findings suggest that anxiety could be mitigated ensuring sufficient levels of protective personal equipment alongside greater education and information.

Objectives World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines for health programmes and healthcare delivery are the foundation of its technical leadership in public health and essential to decision-making globally. A key function of guideline development is to identify areas in which further evidence is needed because filling these gaps will lead to future improvements in population health. The objective of this study was to examine the knowledge gaps and research questions for addressing those gaps generated through the WHO guideline development process, with the goal of informing future strategies for improving and strengthening the guideline development process. Study design We did a systematic, retrospective analysis of research questions identified in the published guidelines. Methods We analyzed guidelines published between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2018, by the Communicable Diseases Cluster in five disease areas: tuberculosis (TB), HIV, malaria, TB-HIV, and neglected tropical diseases (NTDs). Research questions were extracted independently by two researchers. We analyzed the distribution of research questions by disease and by topic category and did a qualitative assessment of optimum practice for research question generation during the guideline development process. Results A total of 48 guidelines were included: 26 on HIV, 1 on malaria, 11 on TB, 5 on TB/HIV, and 5 on NTDs. Overall, 36 (75%) guidelines encompassed a total of 360 explicit research questions; the remainder did not contain specific research questions. The number of research questions that focused on TB was 49, TB/HIV was 38, HIV was 250, and NTDs was 23. The number of research questions that focused on diagnosis was 43 (11.9%) of 360, prevention was 62 (17.2%), treatment was 103 (28.6%), good practice was 12 (3.3%), service delivery was 86 (23.8%), and other areas was 54 (15%). Research questions were often not formulated in a specific or actionable way and were hard to identify in the guideline. Examples of good practice identified by the review team involved the generation of specific and narrowly defined research questions, with accompanying recommendations for appropriate study design. Conclusions The WHO must strengthen its approach to identifying and presenting research questions during the guideline development process. Ensuring access to research questions is a key next step in adding value to the guideline development process., Highlights • We examined the knowledge gaps generated through the World Health Organization (WHO) guideline development process to inform future strategies. • We focused on five disease areas: tuberculosis (TB), HIV, malaria, TB-HIV, and neglected tropical diseases. • Research questions were often not formulated in a specific or actionable way and were hard to be identified. • The WHO must strengthen its approach in identifying research questions during the guideline development process.

Background Migrant populations (defined as foreign-born) in the EU/EEA may be one of several under-immunised populations yet their role in outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs) has been poorly defined to date. Methods We did both a temporal analysis to map published reports of migrant-related outbreaks against data from the ECDC's Surveillance Atlas of Infectious Disease, and a systematic review (PROSPERO CRD42019157473; 1990-2019) adhering to PRISMA guidelines, to explore whether migrants are involved in outbreaks in Europe and which particular subpopulations may be at increased risk. Studies on VPD outbreaks (measles, mumps, rubella, diphtheria, pertussis, polio, hepatitis A, N meningitidis, and H influenzae) in migrants residing in the EU/EEA were included. Results 46 studies were included, reporting on 50 VPD outbreaks across 13 EU/EEA countries, of which 98% (n = 49) occured since January 2000. Measles had the highest number of reports of outbreaks involving migrants (n = 21; 5043 cases), followed by varicella (n = 10; 595 cases) and hepatitis A (n = 10; 1226 cases). 21 (40%) of outbreaks were reported from shelters for asylum seekers and refugees (mainly varicella or measles). Of 27 outbreaks where the index case was defined, 20 (74.1%) were migrants, including 9 (33.3%) from Eastern Europe and 6 (22.2%) from Africa. When mapped against the ECDC timeline of measles outbreaks, migrant-related outbreaks coincide with Europe-wide peaks in measles incidence (in 2006, 2010, and 2018). Conclusions Migrants represent one key group involved in VPD outbreaks, with refugees/asylum seekers residing in shelters or camps particularly at risk. Measles accounted for 38% of all reported outbreaks. Improved data collection on migrant status across Europe is crucial to understanding the complex relationship between migration and occurrence of VPD outbreaks to inform policy decisions on the most effective strategies to prevent future outbreaks. Key messages Migrants represent one key group involved in vaccine-preventable diseases outbreaks in Europe. Refugees and asylum seekers may be particularly at risk.

COVID-19 disproportionately affects vulnerable and marginalized populations such as ethnic minorities and migrant groups. In this perspective we review the complex interaction of the many factors driving these inequities and suggest several possible solutions to mitigate the negative impact of COVID-19 on these populations.

Background The majority of tuberculosis (TB) cases in low-incidence countries occur in migrants. Only few studies have assessed the long-term TB risk in migrants after immigration, and datasets have not considered this across a range of diverse migrant groups. This nationwide study aimed to investigate long-term TB risk among migrants according to migrant status and region of origin. Methods This cohort study included all migrants aged ≥ 18 years who obtained residence in Denmark from 1993 to 2015, with a mean follow-up of 10.8 years [standard deviation (SD) 7.3]. Migrants were categorized based on legal status of residence and region of origin. Incidence rates (IR) and rate ratios (IRR) were estimated by Poisson regression. Results A total of 142 314 migrants were included. Across all migrants, the TB risk was highest during year 1 of residence (IR 275/100 000 person-years; 95% CI 249–305) followed by a gradual decline, though TB risk remained high for over a decade. Compared with the Danish-born population, the IRRs after 7–8 years were particularly higher among former asylum seekers (IRR 31; 95% CI 20–46), quota refugees (IRR 31; 95% CI 16–71), and family-reunified with refugees (IRR 22; 95% CI 12–44). Sub-Saharan African migrants also experienced elevated risk (IRR 75; 95% CI 51–109). The proportion of migrants with pulmonary TB was 52.4%. Conclusion All migrant groups experienced an initial high TB risk, but long-term risk remained high in key migrant groups. Most European countries focus TB screening on or soon after arrival. Our study suggests that approaches to TB screening should be adapted, with migrant populations benefiting from long-term access to preventive health services.

Background Migrants within the European Union and European Economic Area (EU/EEA) may be underimmunised and lack documentation on previous vaccinations. We investigated approaches to vaccination in recently arrived adult and child migrants, and guideline availability and implementation. Methods: Between March and May 2017, a national vaccination expert from every EU/EEA country and Switzerland completed an electronic questionnaire. We used descriptive analyses to calculate percentages, and framework analysis to synthesise free-text responses. Results: We approached 32 countries (response rate 100%). Although 28 experts reported vaccination guidance at national level, specific guidelines for recently arrived migrants were only available in six countries and not consistently implemented. Twenty-three countries administered vaccinations during on-arrival health checks. Most experts recommended multiple vaccination opportunities be made available: at point of entry (n = 13) or at holding level (reception centres, migrant camps, detention centres) (n = 21). In 30 countries, child migrants without evidence of previous vaccination were re-vaccinated according to the national schedule. Diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus and polio vaccinations were given to migrant children in all countries, measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) in 31 countries, hepatitis B vaccination in 25. Low levels of catch-up vaccination were reported in adult migrants, with only 13 countries offering MMR and 10 countries charging fees. Conclusion: Existing guidance is often not migrant-specific and may not be applied in practice; clarification is needed on which vaccines should be given. Strategies are needed specifically for catch-up vaccination in adult migrants. Vaccinations should be offered in multiple settings, free of charge, with sufficient guidance and training provided to front-line healthcare professionals.

Summary Progress in the development and introduction of paediatric formulations for key infectious diseases is poor in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). Although major steps have been made in the scale-up of antiretroviral medicines in LMICs, the development and deployment of formulations for infants and children is suboptimal. Of the children living with HIV globally (most in Africa), only 43% are receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART), many with suboptimal formulations. These shortfalls pose a series of challenges to meeting global treatment targets of 1·6 million children (aged 0–14 years) on ART by the end of 2018 (95% coverage) and to ensuring that 95% of those on ART are virologically suppressed. The Global Accelerator for Paediatric Formulations (GAP-f) has been developed to accelerate research, development, regulatory filing, introduction, and uptake of prioritised paediatric antiretrovirals in age-appropriate formulations by 2020, with innovative, strategic, and sustainable financing. The GAP-f will build on existing efforts to maximise coordination and alignment of policy makers, research networks, regulatory agencies, funding organisations, and manufacturers in paediatric HIV and other paediatric diseases, including tuberculosis, viral hepatitis, and other infectious diseases. Paediatric drug development and scale-up will require special efforts to bring greater visibility and new solutions to ensure that children in LMICs have access to effective and appropriate treatment options.

Objectives The proportion of tuberculosis (TB) cases occurring in migrants in Europe is increasing. Extrapulmonary TB poses challenges in diagnosis and treatment and causes serious morbidity and mortality, yet its extent in migrant populations is unclear. We assessed patterns of extrapulmonary TB in migrants across the European Union (EU)/European Free Trade Association (EFTA). We investigated the proportion of extrapulmonary TB cases among migrants versus non-migrants, and variations by specific site of disease, reporting European region, and migrant region of origin. Methods We carried out a cross-sectional secondary database analysis, utilizing 23 years of data collected between 1995 and 2017 from the European Surveillance System of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control for 32 EU/EFTA countries. Results In total, 1 270 896 TB cases were included, comprising 326 987 migrants (25.7%) and 943 909 non-migrants (74.3%). Of TB cases among migrants, 45.2% (n = 147 814) were extrapulmonary compared to 21.7% (n = 204 613) among non-migrants (p

Background Migrants account for the majority of tuberculosis (TB) cases in low-incidence countries in western Europe. TB incidence among migrants might be influenced by patterns of migration, but this is not well understood. Aim To investigate differences in TB risk across migrant groups according to migrant status and region of origin. Methods This prospective cohort study included migrants ≥ 18 years of age who obtained residency in Denmark between 1 January 1993 and 31 December 2015, matched 1:6 to Danish-born individuals. Migrants were grouped according to legal status of residency and region of origin. Incidence rates (IR) and incidence rate ratios (IRR) were estimated by Poisson regression. Results The cohort included 142,314 migrants. Migrants had significantly higher TB incidence (IR: 120/100,000 person-years (PY); 95% confidence interval (CI): 115–126) than Danish-born individuals (IR: 4/100,000 PY; 95% CI: 3–4). The IRR was significantly higher in all migrant groups compared with Danish-born (p Discussion All migrants had higher TB risk compared with the Danish-born population. While screening programmes focus mostly on asylum seekers, other migrant groups with high risk of TB are missed. Awareness of TB risk in all high-risk groups should be strengthened and screening programmes should be optimised.

Background Screening for latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) in migrants is important for elimination of tuberculosis in low-incidence countries, alongside the need to detect blood-borne infections to align with new guidelines on migrant screening for multiple infections in European countries. However, feasibility needs to be better understood. Methods We did a feasibility study to test an innovative screening model offering combined testing for LTBI (QuantiFERON), HIV, hepatitis B/C in a UK emergency department, with two year follow-up. Results 96 economic migrants, asylum seekers and refugees from 43 countries were screened (46 [47.9%] women; mean age 35.2 years [SD 11.7; range 18–73]; mean time in the UK 4.8 years [SD 3.2; range 0–10]). 14 migrants (14.6%) tested positive for LTBI alongside HIV [1], hepatitis B [2], and hepatitis C [1] Of migrants with LTBI, 5 (35.7%) were successfully engaged in treatment. 74 (77.1%) migrants reported no previous screening since migrating to the UK. Conclusion Multi-disease screening in this setting is feasible and merits being further tested in larger-scale studies. However, greater emphasis must be placed on ensuring successful treatment outcomes. We identified major gaps in current screening provision; most migrants had been offered no prior screening despite several years since migration, which holds relevance to policy and practice in the UK and other European countries.

Background The number of people migrating for labour is growing around the world, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. Parents often move for work, leaving their children behind. In China alone there are 61 million left-behind children and adolescents (LBCA). Methods We conducted a systematic review including studies on parental migration and LBCA aged 0–19 years in low- and middle-income countries. Our outcomes were the 10 main causes of disability-adjusted life years in the under-5, 5–9 and 10–19 year age groups. These included nutrition, mental health, unintentional injuries, infectious disease, substance use, unprotected sex, early pregnancy and abuse among. We searched databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL from inception to April 2017, with no language restrictions. We conducted meta-analyses, sensitivity analyses based on the quality of studies, subgroup analyses (internal and international migration and one or two parent absence), and meta-regression to investigate child gender and age. A revised version of the Newcastle-Ottawa tool was used to assess bias. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42017064871). Results We identified 111 studies, including 2 64 967 children and adolescents. 91 studies were conducted in China, all of which focused on internal migration. The other 20 studies were largely related to international migration in Asia. LBCA had an increased risk of depression (risk ratio (RR) 1.52; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.27,1.82) and higher depression scores (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.16; 0.10,0.21), anxiety (RR 1.85;95% CI 1.36,2.53 and SMD 0.18; 95% CI 0.11,0.26), suicidal ideation (RR 1·70; 95% CI 1.28,2.26), conduct disorder (SMD 0.16; 95% CI 0.04,0.28) and substance use (RR 1.24; 95% CI 1.00,1.52). There was an increased risk of malnutrition: wasting (RR 1.13; 95% CI 1.02,1.24) and stunting (RR 1.12; 95% CI 1.00,1.26). We found no difference for other nutrition outcomes, unintentional injury, abuse or diarrhoea. Removing low quality studies made little difference to the outcomes, as did subgroup analyses. Meta-regression showed no significant effect of gender or mean age on any outcomes. Conclusions Parental labour migration is associated with morbidity in LBCA, with no evidence of any benefit. The strongest evidence exists in China, with more research required in the rest of the world.

Background Undocumented migrant women experience complex barriers to maternity services, are less likely to receive the recommended level of maternity care, and have poorer obstetric outcomes than non-migrant women. There are concerns increasing restrictions on entitlement to health services have a detrimental impact on access to services and obstetric outcomes, particularly among undocumented migrant women. The study aimed to investigate the experiences of undocumented migrant women who have been pregnant in England, and factors affecting access to care and health outcomes. Methods We conducted in-depth semi-structured interviews June–December 2017 with a purposive sample of migrant women born outside the UK (aged>18) who had experiences of pregnancy and undocumented status (without permission to reside) in the UK, recruited through Doctors of the World (DOTW) UK. Interpreting services were used on request. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analysed using thematic analysis. Ethical approval: Imperial College London Research Ethics Committee (ICREC reference: 17IC3924). Results Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 participants, 10 of whom had their first antenatal appointment after the national target of 13 weeks, and nine of whom reported complications. Themes defining women's experiences of pregnancy included: restricted agency, intersecting stressors, and an ongoing cycle of precarity, defined by legal status, social isolation, and economic status. Conclusions This study provides new evidence of women's experiences of pregnancy in the UK in the context of increasingly restrictive health policies including charging and data sharing. Six recommendations are made to ensure the UK and other migrant receiving countries work towards reducing inequalities and achieving national and global targets for maternal and child health and universal health coverage., Highlights • Undocumented migrant women not entitled to free NHS England maternity services. • Half of women interviewed experienced delays in accessing NHS maternity services. • Key themes included restricted agency, stressors, and a cycle of precarity. • Six immediate recommendations for policy and practice are drawn from the findings.

The 2015–2017 global migratory crisis saw unprecedented numbers of people on the move and tremendous diversity in terms of age, gender and medical requirements. This article focuses on key emerging public health issues around migrant populations and their interactions with host populations. Basic needs and rights of migrants and refugees are not always respected in regard to article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and article 23 of the Refugee Convention. These are populations with varying degrees of vulnerability and needs in terms of protection, security, rights, and access to healthcare. Their health status, initially conditioned by the situation at the point of origin, is often jeopardised by adverse conditions along migratory paths and in intermediate and final destination countries. Due to their condition, forcibly displaced migrants and refugees face a triple burden of non-communicable diseases, infectious diseases, and mental health issues. There are specific challenges regarding chronic infectious and neglected tropical diseases, for which awareness in host countries is imperative. Health risks in terms of susceptibility to, and dissemination of, infectious diseases are not unidirectional. The response, including the humanitarian effort, whose aim is to guarantee access to basic needs (food, water and sanitation, healthcare), is gripped with numerous challenges. Evaluation of current policy shows insufficiency regarding the provision of basic needs to migrant populations, even in the countries that do the most. Governments around the world need to rise to the occasion and adopt policies that guarantee universal health coverage, for migrants and refugees, as well as host populations, in accordance with the UN Sustainable Development Goals. An expert consultation was carried out in the form of a pre-conference workshop during the 4th International Conference on Prevention and Infection Control (ICPIC) in Geneva, Switzerland, on 20 June 2017, the United Nations World Refugee Day.

Introduction Despite considerable progress, just over half of the 37 million people eligible to start antiretroviral therapy (ART) have accessed treatment and millions of HIV-positive people still do not know their status. With demand for ART continuing to grow, meeting the ambitious 90-90-90 HIV treatment targets will depend on improved access to high-quality diagnostics to both diagnose infection and monitor treatment adherence in low and middle-income countries (LMICs). Robust projections of future demand for CD4, viral load (VL), HIV early-infant-diagnosis (EID) tests and HIV rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) are needed as scale-up continues. Methods We estimate the current coverage for HIV diagnostics and project future demand to 2021 using a consolidated forecast using data on past coverage and current demand from a number of sources, from 130 predominantly LMIC countries. Results We forecast that the overall number of CD4 tests is expected to decline between now and 2021 as more countries adopt test-and-treat and shift to VL testing for patient monitoring. Our consolidated forecast projects a gradual decline in demand for CD4 tests to 16.6 million by 2021. We anticipate that demand for VL tests will increase to 28.5 million by 2021, reflecting the increasing number of people who will receive ART and the adoption of VL testing for patient monitoring. We expect that the demand for EID tests will grow more rapidly than in past years, driven by the implementation of testing at birth in programmes globally, in line with WHO guideline recommendations, doubling to 2.1 million tests by 2021. Demand for rapid diagnostic tests is also likely to increase, reaching 509 million tests by 2021. Discussion In order to achieve the ambitious 90-90-90 targets, it will be essential to maintain and improve access to CD4, VL, EID tests and RDTs. These projections provide insight into the global demand we can expect to see for these HIV monitoring and diagnostic tests, both in relation to historical trends, and the 90-90-90 targets. Our projections will better enable producers to ensure adequate supply, and to support procurement organisations in planning future funding and purchase plans to meet the anticipated demand. The findings highlight the ongoing need for governments and international funding bodies to prioritise improving capacity and access to HIV diagnostic and monitoring technologies in line with demand.