Table 3 Summary of content-related information

Germans

Turkish

Former Yugoslavian

Former citizens of the Soviet-Union

Resettler

Mediterranean (S, G, P, I)

Other (e.g. non-Turkish, non-German, EU-nationals)

Nationality

Place of birth

Migration experience/status/ immigration after 1949

Spoken/native language

Other (e.g. PMB and non-PMB not specified)

Medical indications^a

Utilisation of medical rehabilitation services

Barriers to medical rehabilitation services

Satisfaction with the utilisation of rehabilitation services

Perceptions/ expectations and needs/ intentions

Rehabilitation (treatment) success/ treatment outcome

Work-related performance

Return to work

1.

Aksakal et al. 2018 [27]

^b

o

x

x

x

Insufficient knowledge, treatment desires, language barriers for PMB compared to non-PMB

2.

Brause et al. 2010 [28]

[29, 30]

x

x

x^*

x

1-6

x

x

x

x

x

Turkish PMB: lower rehabilitation success and work ability for musculoskeletal/connective tissue, mental illnesses metabolism/digestion and other (respiratory diseases) than for non-PMB

Barriers for Turkish PMB (access, knowledge, language, culture)

3.

Brzoska et al. 2019 [31]

[32]

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

German nationals (non-PMB and PMB) and non-German nationals did not differ in their utilisation of rehabilitation

4.

Brzoska et al. 2019 [33]

x

x

x

x

X^c

x

Foreigners (PMB) compared to Germans without Resettler status had a lower chance to use medical rehabilitation

Resettler had a higher chance of using rehabilitation compared to foreigners

5.

Brzoska et al. 2017 [34]

x

x

x

x

x

x

1-3,6

x

Lower probability for satisfaction with rehabilitation for Turkish nationals (PMB)

Other foreign nationals were as satisfied as German nationals (non-PMB)

6.

Brzoska et al. 2016 [35]

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Non-Germans report less favourable outcomes, Turkish and former Yugoslavian origin have a higher chance for a poor treatment outcome than patients from Mediterranean countries

7.

Brzoska et al. 2012 [36]

[13]

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Non-Germans showed a higher chance for low occupational performance after completing the rehabilitation a lower effectiveness of rehabilitation for Turkish and former Yugoslavian compared to Germans

8.

Brzoska et al. 2010 [13]

[15, 37, 21, 38,39,40, 20]

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

1-6

x

x

x

x

X

Non-Germans less utilised rehabilitation than Germans,

Foreigner have a higher chance than Germans for occupational diseases, lower rehabilitation occupational performance and effectiveness after rehabilitation, PMB had barriers for utilisation compared to non-PMB: expectations, information deficit, missing intention to apply, language and culture

9.

Erbstößer/ Zollmann 2015 [41]

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

1-6

x

x

x

x

Non-Germans less utilised rehabilitation (heterogeneous for nationalities), had less often a full work performance after rehabilitation than Germans,

Differences in indications e.g. for musculoskeletal rehabilitation: patients from former Soviet-Union utilised more than other nationals and Germans

10.

Göbber et al. 2010 [42]

[43]

x

x

x

x

x

2-5

x

x

x

x

PMB were pension-oriented, desired for gender-specific treatment

PMB had a shorter treatment-duration, negative work performance (subjective), more mental and somatoform illnesses than non-PMB

11.

Gruner et al. 2012 [44]

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

5

x

x

x

PMB had a higher frequency for diseases, less work performance before and after rehabilitation (subjective), pension desire, are sicker at the beginning of rehabilitation, men (non-PMB) benefitted less

12.

Höhne 2007a [45]

x

x

X

x

1-3,5-6

x

x

Disabled pensioners (PMB) utilised less rehabilitation services in the last five years before retirement

13.

Höhne / Schubert 2007b [46]

x

x

X

x

1-6

x

x

Differences in the medical rehabilitation benefits between Germans and Non-Germans in the last 5 years before retirement: Non-German had a higher incapacity for work, mental illnesses affect non-Germans more than Germans

14.

Höhne et al. 2007c [47]

x

X

x

1-3,5-6

x

x

x

Differences in the utilisation of rehabilitation: Germans utilised more services of rehabilitation than PMB

15.

Jankowiak et al. 2018 [48]

x

x

x

x

x

Medical rehabilitation was less utilised by non-Germans than Germans,

Applications for rehabilitation were lower for non-Germans than Germans

16.

Kaluscha et al. 2011 [49]

x

x

x

x

x

x

1-5

x

Turkish nationals utilise rehabilitation more often due to mental illnesses than Germans

17.

Kessemaier et al. 2019 [50]

x

x

x

x

x

x

PMB showed severe symptoms and were not as satisfied with the rehabilitation as non-PMB

18.

MHH/ EMZ e.V. 2017 [51]

[52, 53, 19]

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Barriers to utilise rehabilitation: migrant specific (information deficit), person-related barriers (language), systematic-related barriers (bureaucracy), barriers independent of migrant status (fear of job loss),

Increased application intention through the campaign for PMB

19.

Kohler/ Ziese 2004 [54]

x

x

x

x

x

x

PMB utilised rehabilitation less often than Germans

20.

Maier 2008 [55]

x

x

x

x

1-3,5

x

x

Turkish rehabilitants utilised more rehabilitation services than the non-Turkish, health did not improve as much as in non-Turkish,

differences in indications: more musculoskeletal and mental illnesses for Turkish PMB

21.

Pfeiffer et al. 2010 [43]

[42]

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

2-4

x

x

x

PMB were pension-oriented, had a shorter treatment-duration, more mental and somatoform illnesses than non-PMB, other treatment expectations than non-PMB

22.

Ritter et al. 2017 [56]

x

X

x

2

x

Lower chance of utilisation for foreign nationals with hip and knee arthroplasty compared to Germans

23.

Schröder et al. 2020 [57]

x

x

x

x

x

x

First-generation migrants had a lower chance of utilising outpatient rehabilitation than non-migrants

No differences between first- and second-generation migrants and non-migrants for any rehabilitation

24.

Yilmaz-Aslan et al. 2017 [58]

[59]

x

x

x

x

1

x

x

x

x

Turkish PMB in comparison to Germans: higher need for support (information and emotional), psycho-oncological care was rarely utilised, barriers for Turkish-PMB e.g. information deficit, culture, language and prejudice

25.

Zollmann et al. 2016 [60]

x

x

x

x

x

5

x

x

x

x

Turkish PMB is largest group in psychosomatic rehabilitation (year 2012), were sicker at the beginning of rehabilitation than non-Turkish nationals, reintegration into working life is less successful for them