Demi Krystallidou1, Carma L Bylund2, Peter Pype3. 1. KU Leuven, Faculty of Arts, Antwerp Sint Jacob Campus, Antwerp, Belgium. Electronic address: demi.krystallidou@kuleuven.be. 2. University of Florida, Department of Public Relations, College of Journalism and Communications, Gainesville, USA. 3. Ghent University, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Ghent, Belgium.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate how empathic communication is expressed in interpreter-mediated consultations (IMCs) and the interpreter's effect on it. METHODS: We coded 20 authentic video-recorded IMCs by using the Empathic Communication Coding System (ECCS). We compared patient-initiated empathic opportunities (EOs) and doctors' responses as expressed by patients and doctors and as rendered by interpreters. RESULTS: We identified 44 EOs. In 2 of the 44 EOs there was a close match in the way the EOs were expressed by the patient in the first place and in the way they were rendered by the interpreter. Twenty-four of the 44 EOs that were passed on by the interpreter to the doctor and presented the doctor with an opportunity to respond, came with a shift in meaning and/or intensity. Twenty of the 44 EOs were not passed on by the interpreter to the doctor. CONCLUSION: In IMCs, EOs are subject to the interpreter's renditions and the doctor's actions during interaction. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Doctors and interpreters require skills to detect patient cues, assess them correctly, render them completely and in an appropriate manner (interpreters) and display communicative behaviours that take into account the intricacies of interpreter-mediated clinical communication and facilitate each other's communicative goals.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate how empathic communication is expressed in interpreter-mediated consultations (IMCs) and the interpreter's effect on it. METHODS: We coded 20 authentic video-recorded IMCs by using the Empathic Communication Coding System (ECCS). We compared patient-initiated empathic opportunities (EOs) and doctors' responses as expressed by patients and doctors and as rendered by interpreters. RESULTS: We identified 44 EOs. In 2 of the 44 EOs there was a close match in the way the EOs were expressed by the patient in the first place and in the way they were rendered by the interpreter. Twenty-four of the 44 EOs that were passed on by the interpreter to the doctor and presented the doctor with an opportunity to respond, came with a shift in meaning and/or intensity. Twenty of the 44 EOs were not passed on by the interpreter to the doctor. CONCLUSION: In IMCs, EOs are subject to the interpreter's renditions and the doctor's actions during interaction. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Doctors and interpreters require skills to detect patient cues, assess them correctly, render them completely and in an appropriate manner (interpreters) and display communicative behaviours that take into account the intricacies of interpreter-mediated clinical communication and facilitate each other's communicative goals.
Authors: Carma L Bylund; Greenberry Taylor; Emily Mroz; Diana J Wilkie; Yingwei Yao; Linda Emanuel; George Fitchett; George Handzo; Harvey Max Chochinov; Susan Bluck Journal: Palliat Support Care Date: 2022-06