Chwan-Fen Yang1, Ben Gray. 1. Department of Primary Health Care and General Practice, University of Otago, PO Box 7343, Wellington South, New Zealand.
Abstract
AIMS: To identify the frequency of medical students interpreting in healthcare settings and to explore the issues related to the use of non-professional interpreters. METHODS: All 4th and 5th year University of Otago medical students were surveyed to identify bilingual medical students who have interpreted for patients. Students and key informants were interviewed and audiotaped. RESULTS: Of the 102 bilingual students identified, 59 interpreted for patients. We analysed 39 student interviews. Most reported a 'good' interpreting experience and thought student interpreting was 'a good idea', but some encountered 'bad' experiences. Stakeholders (professional interpreters, DHB policy staff, and clinicians who use interpreters) thought students should not interpret. Issues explored were: student comfort, clinician's choice, the interpreter's role, cultural competency, awareness, and provision of interpreting services. CONCLUSIONS: A considerable proportion of bilingual clinical medical students have interpreted for patients contrary to Capital and Coast District Health Board policy and professional interpreter recommendations. In conjunction with published literature and after consulting with interpreter trainers, we have developed a document which canvasses the issues involved and proposed practical guidelines, to better prepare healthcare professionals and non-professional interpreters for interpreting situations. More research is required to find out why clinicians are asking medical students and others to interpret rather than engaging professional interpreters.
AIMS: To identify the frequency of medical students interpreting in healthcare settings and to explore the issues related to the use of non-professional interpreters. METHODS: All 4th and 5th year University of Otago medical students were surveyed to identify bilingual medical students who have interpreted for patients. Students and key informants were interviewed and audiotaped. RESULTS: Of the 102 bilingual students identified, 59 interpreted for patients. We analysed 39 student interviews. Most reported a 'good' interpreting experience and thought student interpreting was 'a good idea', but some encountered 'bad' experiences. Stakeholders (professional interpreters, DHB policy staff, and clinicians who use interpreters) thought students should not interpret. Issues explored were: student comfort, clinician's choice, the interpreter's role, cultural competency, awareness, and provision of interpreting services. CONCLUSIONS: A considerable proportion of bilingual clinical medical students have interpreted for patients contrary to Capital and Coast District Health Board policy and professional interpreter recommendations. In conjunction with published literature and after consulting with interpreter trainers, we have developed a document which canvasses the issues involved and proposed practical guidelines, to better prepare healthcare professionals and non-professional interpreters for interpreting situations. More research is required to find out why clinicians are asking medical students and others to interpret rather than engaging professional interpreters.
Authors: Jennifer E L Diaz; Nydia Ekasumara; Nikhil R Menon; Edwin Homan; Prashanth Rajarajan; Andrés Ramírez Zamudio; Annie J Kim; Jason Gruener; Edward Poliandro; David C Thomas; Yasmin S Meah; Rainier P Soriano Journal: BMC Med Educ Date: 2016-09-29 Impact factor: 2.463