STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review.
METHODS: A search for relevant articles was carried out using Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and MEDLINE (via EBSCOhost), Scopus, Science Direct, PubMed and Google Scholar with multiple search terms. Inclusion criteria comprised articles published in English language and assessing general health literacy. Risk of bias reduced with the involvement of two independent reviewers in the screening of the literature and the quality assessment process.
RESULTS: A total of 11 studies were included, which only consist of studies from five countries out of 11 making up the Southeast Asian region. The overall prevalence of limited health literacy varied considerably, 1.6%-99.5% with a mean of 55.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 35.1%-75.6%). A much higher prevalence was noted in studies conducted in healthcare settings, 67.5% (95% CI: 48.6%-86.3%). The most common factors associated with limited health literacy were education attainment, age, income and socio-economic background. Other factors identified were gender and health behaviours.
CONCLUSIONS: In summary, despite the little evidence available and existences of high heterogeneity among studies, limited health literacy is still prevalent in Southeast Asian countries. Urgent strategies to improve and promote health literacy in the region are highly warranted. Besides, more studies on health literacy with better quality on the methodology aspect are needed.
METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted 30 semistructured interviews with health policy-makers, health service providers, and other experts working in the United Nations (n = 6), ministries and public health (n = 5), international (n = 9) and national civil society (n = 7), and academia (n = 3) based in Indonesia (n = 6), Malaysia (n = 10), Myanmar (n = 6), and Thailand (n = 8). Data were analysed thematically using deductive and inductive coding. Interviewees described the cumulative nature of health risks at each migratory phase. Perceived barriers to addressing migrants' cumulative health needs were primarily financial, juridico-political, and sociocultural, whereas key facilitators were many health workers' humanitarian stance and positive national commitment to pursuing universal health coverage (UHC). Across all countries, financial constraints were identified as the main challenges in addressing the comprehensive health needs of refugees and asylum seekers. Participants recommended regional and multisectoral approaches led by national governments, recognising refugee and asylum-seeker contributions, and promoting inclusion and livelihoods. Main study limitations included that we were not able to include migrant voices or those professionals not already interested in migrants.
CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is one of the first qualitative studies to investigate the health concerns and barriers to access among migrants experiencing forced displacement, particularly refugees and asylum seekers, in Southeast Asia. Findings provide practical new insights with implications for informing policy and practice. Overall, sociopolitical inclusion of forcibly displaced populations remains difficult in these four countries despite their significant contributions to host-country economies.