MacFarlane Anne, Glynn Liam G, Mosinkie Phillip I, Murphy Andrew W
Department of General Practice, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.
BMC Fam Pract. 2008 Dec 22;9:68. doi: 10.1186/1471-2296-9-68.
Refugees and asylum seekers experience language barriers in general practice. Qualitative studies have found that responses to language barriers in general practice are ad hoc with use of both professional interpreters and informal interpreters (patients' relatives or friends). However, the scale of the issues involved is unknown. This study quantifies the need for language assistance in general practice consultations and examines the experience of, and satisfaction with, methods of language assistance utilized.
Data were collected by telephone survey with general practitioners in a regional health authority in Ireland between July-August 2004. Each respondent was asked a series of questions about consulting with refugees and asylum seekers, the need for language assistance and the kind of language assistance used.
There was a 70% (n = 56/80) response rate to the telephone survey. The majority of respondents (77%) said that they had experienced consultations with refugees and asylum seekers in which language assistance was required. Despite this, general practitioners in the majority of cases managed without an interpreter or used informal methods of interpretation. In fact, when given a choice general practitioners would more often choose informal over professional methods of interpretation despite the fact that confidentiality was a significant concern.
The need for language assistance in consultations with refugees and asylum seekers in Irish general practice is high. General practitioners rely on informal responses. It is necessary to improve knowledge about the organisational contexts that shape general practitioners responses. We also recommend dialogue between general practitioners, patients and interpreters about the relative merits of informal and professional methods of interpretation so that general practitioners' choices are responsive to the needs of patients with limited English.
难民和寻求庇护者在全科医疗中面临语言障碍。定性研究发现，全科医疗中对语言障碍的应对是临时的，会使用专业口译员和非专业口译员（患者的亲属或朋友）。然而，所涉问题的规模尚不清楚。本研究量化了全科医疗咨询中对语言援助的需求，并考察了所使用的语言援助方法的经验和满意度。
2004年7月至8月间，通过电话调查爱尔兰一个地区卫生当局的全科医生收集数据。向每位受访者询问了一系列关于为难民和寻求庇护者提供咨询、对语言援助的需求以及所使用的语言援助类型的问题。
电话调查的回复率为70%（n = 56/80）。大多数受访者（77%）表示，他们曾经历过为难民和寻求庇护者提供咨询且需要语言援助的情况。尽管如此，大多数情况下全科医生在没有口译员或使用非专业口译方法的情况下进行诊疗。事实上，在有选择的情况下，尽管保密性是一个重大问题，但全科医生更常选择非专业而非专业的口译方法。
在爱尔兰的全科医疗中，为难民和寻求庇护者提供咨询时对语言援助的需求很高。全科医生依赖非专业的应对方式。有必要提高对影响全科医生应对方式的组织环境的认识。我们还建议全科医生、患者和口译员就非专业和专业口译方法的相对优点进行对话，以便全科医生的选择能够满足英语水平有限患者的需求。
