Uptake and experience of professional interpreting services in primary care in a South Asian population: a national cross-sectional study.

IF 2 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
G Hieke, E D Williams, P Gill, G B Black, L Islam, C Vindrola-Padros, J Yargawa, S Braun, K L Whitaker
{"title":"Uptake and experience of professional interpreting services in primary care in a South Asian population: a national cross-sectional study.","authors":"G Hieke, E D Williams, P Gill, G B Black, L Islam, C Vindrola-Padros, J Yargawa, S Braun, K L Whitaker","doi":"10.1186/s12875-024-02646-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Interpreting services bridge language barriers that may prevent patients and clinicians from understanding each other, impacting quality of care and health outcomes. Despite this, there is limited up-to-date evidence regarding the barriers to and facilitators of uptake in primary care. The aim of this study was to ascertain current national uptake and experience of interpreting services in primary care (general practice) by South Asian communities in England.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a national cross-sectional survey in 2023 with people with limited or no English language proficiency (n = 609). Multilingual researchers interviewed people from Bangladeshi (n = 213), Indian (n = 200), and Pakistani (n = 196) backgrounds from four regions in England (Greater London, Midlands, Yorkshire and the Humber, North West).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixty-three percent of participants reported using professional interpreting services in primary care. The most common modality was face-to-face interpreting (55%), followed by telephone (17%) and video (8%). Multivariable analysis identified several correlates of lower uptake: participants from Indian backgrounds, those living in the Midlands, and those whose family member/friend interpreted for them within the past year were less likely to have used a professional interpreter provided by their general/family practice. Participants who had visited primary care within the last 12 months, had requested an interpreter but were told they could not have one, were informed about professional interpreting services, and were given choice in their language support were more likely to have used a professional interpreter.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our approach provides novel data on professional interpreting service use and evidence about the factors that may play a role in patient uptake and experience.</p>","PeriodicalId":72428,"journal":{"name":"BMC primary care","volume":"25 1","pages":"405"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11600964/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC primary care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-024-02646-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Interpreting services bridge language barriers that may prevent patients and clinicians from understanding each other, impacting quality of care and health outcomes. Despite this, there is limited up-to-date evidence regarding the barriers to and facilitators of uptake in primary care. The aim of this study was to ascertain current national uptake and experience of interpreting services in primary care (general practice) by South Asian communities in England.

Methods: We conducted a national cross-sectional survey in 2023 with people with limited or no English language proficiency (n = 609). Multilingual researchers interviewed people from Bangladeshi (n = 213), Indian (n = 200), and Pakistani (n = 196) backgrounds from four regions in England (Greater London, Midlands, Yorkshire and the Humber, North West).

Results: Sixty-three percent of participants reported using professional interpreting services in primary care. The most common modality was face-to-face interpreting (55%), followed by telephone (17%) and video (8%). Multivariable analysis identified several correlates of lower uptake: participants from Indian backgrounds, those living in the Midlands, and those whose family member/friend interpreted for them within the past year were less likely to have used a professional interpreter provided by their general/family practice. Participants who had visited primary care within the last 12 months, had requested an interpreter but were told they could not have one, were informed about professional interpreting services, and were given choice in their language support were more likely to have used a professional interpreter.

Conclusions: Our approach provides novel data on professional interpreting service use and evidence about the factors that may play a role in patient uptake and experience.

南亚人口在初级保健中对专业口译服务的使用和体验:一项全国横断面研究。
背景:口译服务可消除语言障碍,这些障碍可能会妨碍患者和临床医生相互理解,从而影响医疗质量和健康结果。尽管如此,有关在初级医疗中使用口译服务的障碍和促进因素的最新证据却很有限。本研究旨在了解英格兰南亚社区目前在初级医疗(全科)中对口译服务的使用情况和体验:我们于 2023 年对英语水平有限或没有英语水平的人群(n = 609)进行了一次全国性横断面调查。多语言研究人员采访了来自英格兰四个地区(大伦敦地区、中部地区、约克郡和亨伯地区、西北地区)的孟加拉人(n = 213)、印度人(n = 200)和巴基斯坦人(n = 196):63%的参与者表示在初级保健中使用过专业口译服务。最常见的方式是面对面口译(55%),其次是电话口译(17%)和视频口译(8%)。多变量分析发现了几种使用率较低的相关因素:印第安背景的参与者、居住在中部地区的参与者以及在过去一年中其家人/朋友曾为其提供过口译服务的参与者不太可能使用其全科/家庭诊所提供的专业口译员。在过去 12 个月内曾就诊于基层医疗机构、曾要求获得口译服务但被告知无法获得口译服务、了解专业口译服务并可选择语言支持的参与者更有可能使用过专业口译服务:我们的方法提供了有关专业口译服务使用情况的新数据,并证明了可能影响患者使用情况和体验的因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信