Interview and Training

Update Tricc-partners

2nd Partnermeeting Tricc, Istanbul, Turkey, 11th of September, 2009Sione Twilt & Hans Harmsen, The Netherlands

Interviews NL

• Target groups: • General practitioners and social care providers

• Informal interpreters

• Research:• Semi – structured interview

Aims of the research

• Gaining insight into needs, knowledge, attitudes and experiences from care providers and interpreters in bilingual medical conversation.

• Identifying the needs and wishes of care providers concerning the training in bilingual consultations.

Topics health care providers

• Experiences (good and bad practice)

• Other professionals

• Opinions

• Organization

• Government policy

• Communication

• Training

Topics informal interpreters

• Background• Spoken languages• Home situation• Experiences in translating• Opinions• Communication and roles• Description last visit to the doctor as an interpreter

Respondents Health care providers

Respondents Work setting

1. Social care provider GGZ – Amsterdam

2. Psychosocial nurse GGZ – Amsterdam

3. Psychiatrist GGZ – Amsterdam

4. Psychomotor therapist GGZ – Amsterdam

5 - 15 General practitioners Private practice - Rotterdam

Total 15 Health care providers

Respondents Informal Interpreters

Respondents Age

1. Moroccan woman 34

2. Turkish woman 22

3. Turkish woman 23

4. Azeri woman 25

5. Moroccan man 22

6. Moroccan woman 25

7. Italian - Colombian man 22

8. Turkish woman 19

9. Turkish woman 24

Total 9 Interpreters15 planned

Number of interviews

• Total interviews health care providers: 15• 4 social care providers

• 11 general practitioners

• 8 men, 7 women

• Total interviews interpreters: • 9 Informal interpreters (15 planned)

• 2 men, 7 women

Procedure

• All interviews were audio taped• Average time was 45 minutes• All interviews care providers have been transcribed in

Dutch• All transcripts care providers have been verified by a

second researcher• Interviews interpreters are being transcribed

Analysis

• Transcripts are going to be analyzed along different categories

• MAXQDA • Researcher (care providers) and Masterstudent

(interpreters)• Comparison between two groups

Main findings: Social Care providers

• Use of formal interpreters• Preference formal interpreters• Being an informal interpreter is aggravating• Sometimes informal interpreting ‘happens to them’• No child interpreters• Responsible for arranging an interpreter• Doubt of reliability of formal interpreter• Training wishes: telephone interpreting, hearing the

experiences of interpreters

Main findings: General Practitioners

• Use of informal interpreters• Complex cases use of formal interpreters (rare)• Preference informal or no interpreter (just learn Dutch)• Time constraint• Patient is responsible for arranging an interpreter• Use of child interpreters (but no preference)• Use of other intermediaries (care manager, GP in training,

medical nurse)• Not aware of interpreting issues• Training wishes: role play, analyzing consultations

Similarities

• Doubt of translation: difference in length of utterances• Controlling if their message comes across seems

impossible• No familiarity with government policy• According to respondents patients aren’t aware of policy• No explicit organizational policy• Developing their own system in working with bilingual

consultations• Training wishes: cases, role play, knowledge

Preliminary findings informal interpreters

• No familiarity with government policy• Expectation: parents prefer a family member who

translates• Speaking about private matters make them feel

uncomfortable• As a child the task of being an interpreter was harder• …

Products of analysis

Performed:• Presentation of results at COMET09 (Cardiff, UK)• Data used as cases for training

To be done:• Report (Tricc site)• Public report Brussels• Dutch Publication• International Publication (with all partners)?

Training

• Target groups• General practitioners, Rotterdam

• October 2009

• Social care providers, Amsterdam

• March 2010

Training General practitioners

• Content• Knowledge

• Law and regulations concerning interpreting

• Language and cultural barriers

• Three party talk

• Awareness

• Roles of the (in)formal interpreter

• Role of gp in interpreted consultations

• Skills

• Working with formal interpreters

• Reflecting on own communication strategies

• Getting the message across through an interpreter

Training General practitioners

• Method and tools• Information transfer

(presentations, demonstrations, sharing experiences)

• Forum theatre (images, role play)

• Counseling (during role play)

• Measuring bilingual awareness after intervention

(filling in statements before and after the training)

• Evaluating the organizational aspects (form)

Training General practitioners

• Organizational aspects• Duration: 12 hours

• October 29th (day, 8 hours) & December 1st (evening, 4 hours)

• Recruitment

• Funds, Press, Websites, Invitations respondents

• Different trainers:

• Kees Deenik (Forum theatre)

• Hanneke Bot (Presentation/demonstration formal interpreters)

• Hans Harmsen (Presentation cultural aspects)

• Sione Twilt (Presentation informal interpreters)

• Informal interpreter (Sharing experiences)

Training Social care providers

• March 2010• Training in development• Comparable concept as training gp’s

(methods, tools and trainers)• Emphasis on formal interpreting