Table 2.

Overview and brief explanation of the methodological approach of the study

Methods overview	Explanation
Study design	Quasi-experimental.
Sample	9500 newly arrived refugees (4750 per access model) in 6 municipalities in the federal state of North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany.
Study period	2–2016 to 4–2017.
Main hypothesis	The local access model (HcV vs eHC) and its implementation influences the access to healthcare for newly arrived refugees, leading to differences in realised access between models.
Subhypotheses	Emergency care: using the HcV model leads to higher use of emergency care services compared with the eHC model. Delayed treatment: using the HcV model leads to higher rates of ambulatory care sensitive conditions (ACSC) compared with the eHC model. Non-urgency of treatment: using the HcV model leads to lower use of (deferrable) outpatient services compared with the eHC model.
Outcomes	Quarterly incidence rates (IR) and relative risks (RR) of emergency cases (1), ACSC (2) and use of (deferrable) outpatient services (3-5).
Analyses	For each of the three outcomes, we will perform: Descriptive analysis of IR and RR for seven quarters. Individual-level analysis: logistic regression analysis. Ecological analysis: generalised linear models.

eHC, electronic health card model; HcV, healthcare voucher model.