• Br J Gen Pract · Jun 2020

    Exploring patient preference regarding interpreter use in primary care.

    • Heather Steele, David Lehane, Elizabeth Walton, and Caroline Mitchell.
    • University of Sheffield.
    • Br J Gen Pract. 2020 Jun 1; 70 (suppl 1).

    BackgroundEffective communication is considered an essential component of delivering health care. Trained, professional interpreters are the gold standard for overcoming language barriers with those with limited English proficiency (LEP). However, LEP patients often use unqualified interpreters such as family members and friends. Existing literature explores the rationale behind choosing different interpreters, but rarely from the patient perspective.AimTo explore the patient perspective on the type of interpreter best suited for primary care consultations.MethodParticipants self-identified as having LEP were recruited from four GP practices in areas of Sheffield with high proportions of black and minority ethnic (BME) residents. The participants were from Urdu-, Arabic-, or Romani-speaking ethnic groups. Semi-structured interpreted interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analysed thematically with independent verification of emergent themes. Interviews continued to data saturation.ResultsAll participants expressed a preference for face-to-face interpreters. Urdu and Arabic participants highlighted the importance of using an interpreter with the same dialect; Roma participants were passionate about the need for qualified Roma interpreters. Most participants also identified trust and sex as important factors. However, interpreter preference varied between participants: some valued the continuity of family members, whereas others favoured the professionalism and linguistic accuracy associated with qualified interpreters.ConclusionThis study identified conflicts between patient preferences and guidance for healthcare professionals; all of the participants disliked telephone interpreting, and many recognised the benefits of untrained interpreters. The study highlights the complexities of interpreter preference in primary care and suggests that the decision should be flexible, and patient centred.© British Journal of General Practice 2020.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.