Johanna Granhagen Jungner1, Elisabet Tiselius2, Pernilla Pergert3. 1. Department of Women's and Children's Health, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. Electronic address: johanna.granhagen-jungner@ki.se. 2. Department of Women's and Children's Health, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden; Department of Swedish Language and Multilingualism, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden. Electronic address: elisabet.tiselius@su.se. 3. Department of Women's and Children's Health, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. Electronic address: pernilla.pergert@ki.se.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the reasons for not using interpreters to secure patient-safe communication. METHODS: Healthcare personnel at six paediatric oncology centres in Sweden responded to the Communication over Language Barriers questionnaire. Descriptive and comparative analyses were performed. RESULTS: The participants (n = 267) often cared for patients with limited Swedish proficiency, although they were not trained in using interpreters. A lack of time was perceived as a barrier in emergency care situations, but also in planned care situations. Another barrier was the interpreter's ability to correctly interpret medical/care terminology. There were significant differences in evaluating the interpreters' abilities between those with/without education in using interpreters, and between Medical Doctors and Nursing Assistants. Participants were unsure whether the patient had received the correct information and thought that it was difficult to control the family/patient's understanding of the given information. The vast majority did not perceive financial constraints as a barrier for using interpreters. CONCLUSIONS: Economic resources and legislation are not enough to increase the use of interpreters. Reasons for not using interpreters are found in limitations of time, training, and interpreters' skills and knowledge. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: There is a need for a greater focus on training, interpreters' skills, and booking procedures in paediatric healthcare.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the reasons for not using interpreters to secure patient-safe communication. METHODS: Healthcare personnel at six paediatric oncology centres in Sweden responded to the Communication over Language Barriers questionnaire. Descriptive and comparative analyses were performed. RESULTS: The participants (n = 267) often cared for patients with limited Swedish proficiency, although they were not trained in using interpreters. A lack of time was perceived as a barrier in emergency care situations, but also in planned care situations. Another barrier was the interpreter's ability to correctly interpret medical/care terminology. There were significant differences in evaluating the interpreters' abilities between those with/without education in using interpreters, and between Medical Doctors and Nursing Assistants. Participants were unsure whether the patient had received the correct information and thought that it was difficult to control the family/patient's understanding of the given information. The vast majority did not perceive financial constraints as a barrier for using interpreters. CONCLUSIONS: Economic resources and legislation are not enough to increase the use of interpreters. Reasons for not using interpreters are found in limitations of time, training, and interpreters' skills and knowledge. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: There is a need for a greater focus on training, interpreters' skills, and booking procedures in paediatric healthcare.