1 / 20

Interview and Training Update Tricc-partners

Interview and Training Update Tricc-partners. 2nd Partnermeeting Tricc, Istanbul, Turkey, 11th of September, 2009 Sione Twilt & Hans Harmsen, The Netherlands. Interviews NL. Target groups: General practitioners and social care providers Informal interpreters Research:

lamar-good
Download Presentation

Interview and Training Update Tricc-partners

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Interview and TrainingUpdate Tricc-partners 2nd Partnermeeting Tricc, Istanbul, Turkey, 11th of September, 2009 Sione Twilt & Hans Harmsen, The Netherlands

  2. Interviews NL • Target groups: • General practitioners and social care providers • Informal interpreters • Research: • Semi – structured interview

  3. 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.

  4. Topics health care providers • Experiences (good and bad practice) • Other professionals • Opinions • Organization • Government policy • Communication • Training

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

  6. Respondents Health care providers

  7. Respondents Informal Interpreters

  8. 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

  9. 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

  10. Analysis • Transcripts are going to be analyzed along different categories • MAXQDA • Researcher (care providers) and Masterstudent (interpreters) • Comparison between two groups

  11. 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

  12. 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

  13. 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

  14. 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 • …

  15. 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)?

  16. Training • Target groups • General practitioners, Rotterdam • October 2009 • Social care providers, Amsterdam • March 2010

  17. 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

  18. 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)

  19. 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)

  20. Training Social care providers • March 2010 • Training in development • Comparable concept as training gp’s (methods, tools and trainers) • Emphasis on formal interpreting

More Related