Screening female refugees in Sudan’s challenging Settings: A simple, feasible, and affordable telemedicine framework

Abstract

Background and Aims: Cancers often go unnoticed during emergencies; exacerbating underdiagnoses and late presentations. Telemedicine-driven screening systems emerge as effective and economical alternatives, particularly crucial amidst Sudan’s current refugee situation. Methods: Using the 3-step process: First, cancer burden was assessed using Refugees Commission data and presented as per 100,000 period prevalence. Second, case definitions for malignancies under study were then created as a screening base. Third, the telemedicine framework was built following user-centered design’s (UCD) 4 steps (analysis of stakeholders’ needs; design using the MAIA model; implementation according to BPMN flowchart; and users’ feedback evaluation). Results: The most common tumor was breast followed by ovarian cancer (median≤16.45 and 3.19 per 100,000). UCD’s four steps shaped our framework, with MAIA aiding the management plan’s design for suspected cases. BPMN guaranteed seamless implementation, and our model scored 6.83 out of 7 on a Martinez-Alcalá inspired Likert system upon evaluation. Conclusions: Designing a telemedicine-based screening system for refugees necessitates incorporating epidemiological mapping, clinical presentations, contextual and cultural dimensions, and ensuring overall feasibility.

References

1. 1.Jozef Suvada. Poor outcomes for migrants and refugees with cancer. 18th. European Cancer Congress (ECCO). 26 Sept 2015. Available from: https:// www.ecco-org.eu/Vienna2015/Global/ News/ECC-2015-News/2015/10/Pooroutcomes-for-migrants-and-refugeeswith-cancer.Accessedon10Nov2018.
2. 2.Hafifa Siddiq Shabaik. Beyond Resettlement: Sociocultural Factors of Preventive Health and Cancer Screening among Afghan Refugee Women [PhD dissertationontheInternet].LosAngles, US: UCLA; 2018 [cited 2024 Mar 22]. Available from: https://escholarship. org/content/qt5vw711n2/qt5vw711n2_ noSplash_7c341d38b3ff886d- 4f6cc44447cf12ce.pdf?t=pad2dj.
3. 3.Walker PF, Settgast A, DeSilva MB. Cancer Screening in Refugees and Immigrants: A Global Perspective. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2022 May 9;106(6):1593–600. doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.21-0692. doi:10.4269/ajtmh.21-0692
4. 4.World Health Organization and UN Inter-Agency Task Force on NCDs. Non-communicable diseases in emergencies. Accessed 20 October 2018. Available from: http://apps.who.int/ iris/bitstream/10665/204627/1/WHO_ NMH_NVI_ 16.2_eng.pdf.
5. 5.Jobanputra K, Boulle P, Roberts B, Perel P. Three Steps to Improve Management of Non-communicable Diseases in Humanitarian Crises. PLOS Med 2016;13(11):e1002180. doi:10.1371/ journal.pmed.1002180.
6. 6.Kutluk T, Şahin B, Kirazlı M, et al. Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes of Cancer Cases Among Syrian Refugees From Southern Turkey. JAMA Netw Open. 2023;6(5):e2312903. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.12903. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.12903
7. 7.Perone SA, Martinez E, du Mortier S, Rossi R, Pahud M, Urbaniak V, Chappuis F, Hagon O, Bausch FJ, Beran D. Non-communicablediseasesinhumanitarian settings: ten essential questions. Confl Health 2017;11(17):1-11. https:// doi.org/10.1186/s13031-017-0119-8. 48 Majmaah Journal of Health Sciences ,Vol. 12, Issue 3 , July - 2024, DhuAl-Hijjah - 1445 Screening female refugees in Sudan’s challenging Settings:Asimple, feasible, and affordable telemedicine framework doi:10.1186/s13031-017-0119-8
8. 8.Spiegel P, Khalifa A, and Mateen FJ. Cancer in Refugees in Jordan and Syria between 2009 and 2012: Challenges and the Way Forward in Humanitarian Emergencies. Lancet Oncology 2014; doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70067-1. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70067-1