Qualitative study uncovers barriers and supportive factors in accessing medical care among Ukrainian refugees in Germany, highlighting the need for improved information exchange.
Purpose Over 1.2 million refugees from Ukraine have been registered in Germany and are entitled to access medical care. This study aims to comprehensively assess the supportive factors and barriers experienced by Ukrainian refugees in general practice in Germany from patient view. Design/methodology/approach The authors conducted ten qualitative interviews with Ukrainian refugees in Germany in Ukrainian, English and German. The interviews were analyzed using a qualitative content analysis with MAXQDA. Findings Ukrainian refugees reported a series of barriers hindering the access and utilization of general practice services: lack of information flow regarding the healthcare system and accessing and using general practice care, limited availability of general practitioners for new patients and language barriers. Supportive factors include access to interpreters and language proficiency as well as information exchange through networks, high quality of treatment, access to health insurance and a friendly approach in practices. Practical implications Upon arrival and at the beginning of the stay of Ukrainian refugees, official information and assistance regarding the healthcare system and general practice should reach all refugees, for example, during residence registration, but is currently lacking. Sensitizing general practice teams to potentially diverse health behaviors and system differences, organization and cost coverage for interpreting services urgently need to be addressed. Originality/value For the first time, this study identifies supportive factors and barriers experienced by Ukrainian refugees in general practice in Germany. Improving the mentioned aspects can lead to better integration of this big group of individuals, enhance their health and have an impact on treatment of other refugee groups.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rolke et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: