Department of Communication Science, Amsterdam School of Communication Science (ASCoR), University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Health Expect. 2024 Feb;27(1):e13949. doi: 10.1111/hex.13949.
Global migration has led to a sharp increase in the number of language-discordant consultations (LDCs) in healthcare. Evidence on how healthcare providers (HCPs) meet migrant patients' needs while mitigating language barriers is lacking.
Using purposive and snowball sampling, we recruited twenty-seven Dutch HCPs (M = 45.07, SD = 11.46) and conducted semi-structured interviews to collect qualitative, open-ended data for identifying the communication strategies used with migrant patients in LDCs. We analysed the transcripts using deductive and inductive approaches (e.g., constant comparative method from Grounded Theory). Final pattern codes (i.e., key themes) were discussed among the research team until mutual agreement had been achieved.
Five key themes emerged from the analyses: HCPs often 'got-by' with (1) instrumental and (2) affective communication strategies used in language-concordant consultations to start medical consultations. When some instrumental communication strategies were deemed ineffective (e.g., lingua franca, gesturing, etc.) to bridge language barriers, HCPs turned to (3) incorporating digital tools (e.g., Google Translate). When HCPs were unable to communicate with migrant patients at all, (4) informal, ad-hoc and professional interpreters were involved. Finally, HCPs often (5) involved additional support to engage migrant patients to engage in treatment-related behaviours.
Our results highlight the importance of raising awareness among HCPs about using various combinations of different strategies. The development of a guideline indicating the optimal combination of communication strategies for different medical consultation goals may be useful in reshaping the current communication behaviour of HCPs in LDCs.
HCPs were the study population involved in this qualitative study. Refugee health advisors, general practitioners and linguistic specialists (i.e., members of the Right2Health consortium) with experience with the Dutch healthcare system were involved throughout the development of this research. This includes a review of the research question, participant information sheet and interview topic guide as well as providing interpretations of the data and feedback to this manuscript.
全球移民导致医疗保健中的语言不一致咨询(LDC)数量急剧增加。缺乏关于医疗保健提供者(HCP)在缓解语言障碍的同时满足移民患者需求的证据。
使用有针对性和滚雪球抽样方法,我们招募了 27 名荷兰 HCP(M=45.07,SD=11.46),并进行了半结构化访谈,以收集定性、开放式数据,以确定在 LDC 中与移民患者使用的沟通策略。我们使用演绎和归纳方法(例如,来自扎根理论的恒定比较方法)分析转录本。最终模式代码(即关键主题)在研究团队中进行了讨论,直到达成共识。
从分析中出现了五个关键主题:HCP 经常使用(1)工具性和(2)情感沟通策略在语言一致的咨询中开始医疗咨询。当一些工具性沟通策略被认为无效(例如,通用语、手势等)来弥合语言障碍时,HCP 转向(3)使用数字工具(例如,谷歌翻译)。当 HCP 根本无法与移民患者沟通时,(4)会涉及非正式、临时和专业口译员。最后,HCP 经常(5)获得额外的支持来让移民患者参与与治疗相关的行为。
我们的研究结果强调了提高 HCP 对使用各种策略组合的认识的重要性。制定一份指示用于不同医疗咨询目标的最佳沟通策略组合的指南可能有助于重塑 HCP 在 LDC 中的当前沟通行为。
HCP 是参与这项定性研究的研究人群。有经验的难民健康顾问、全科医生和语言专家(即 Right2Health 联盟的成员)参与了这项研究的开发。这包括审查研究问题、参与者信息表和访谈主题指南,以及对数据进行解释并提供对本手稿的反馈。