• Maria Kletečka-Pulker, Sabine Parrag, Klara Doppler, Sabine Völkl-Kernstock, Michael Wagner, and Thomas Wenzel.
• Institute for Ethics and Law in Medicine, University of Vienna, Spitalgasse 2-4, Hof 2.8, Vienna, Austria. maria.kletecka-pulker@univie.ac.at.
• Wien. Klin. Wochenschr. 2021 Jun 1; 133 (11-12): 610619610-619.

AbstractProfessional interpretation and translation are key issues in the improvement of public health and patient safety in an area of increased migration and multicultural healthcare system needs. Patient safety requires clear and reliable communication to avoid errors in diagnosis, treatment, and neglect of informed consent. Due to the range of languages to be covered, telephone and video interpretation (VI) can be expected to face up to the demands for trained interpreters available on short notice and in more remote healthcare sites.In a pilot project, we implemented a new up to date model video interpretation unit and used a mixed methods approach integrating quantitative and qualitative data in assessing barriers encountered prior to the use of the pilot system and satisfaction with the use of video interpretation in a number of clinical settings, including inpatient and outpatient units, in Austria. Of all respondents (n = 144) 71% reported frequently encountering language barriers, only 37% reported the use of professional interpreters, 81% reported using siblings, parents or other non-professional interpreters, while a considerable percentage (66%) reported using gestures or drawings to communicate, resulting in very low overall satisfaction rate (only 12%) with the prior situation.In the qualitative study the users observed rapid availability, data protection compliance, ability to see the interpreter despite physical distance, absence of potential external influence resulting from personal relationships, user-friendly nature of the technique, legal certainty, absence of the requirement for personal presence, and cost savings as key benefits in the use of the new technology. Of the users of the system 88% (n = 58) rated it as very good (72%) or good (16%).

10 keywords...

hide…