Language barriers have been identified as a key access barrier to healthcare services for immigrants. The aim of this study was twofold: to investigate immigrants’ and healthcare professionals’ experiences with barriers and facilitators of interpreter services, and to examine the influence of barriers to interpreter services on the quality of care from immigrant and healthcare professional perspectives.
Methods:
We searched PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library, Scopus, SocINDEX and PsycINFO, resulting in 1425 studies. A total of 21 original quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods studies published between 1996 and 2021 were assessed as eligible for inclusion.
Results:
Identified barriers included: lack of immediately available interpreter services, cost, lack of knowledge about availability, and attitude towards interpreter services. Facilitators included: a high number of interpreters in the requested language, awareness among healthcare professionals and patients of the patient’s rights to interpreters, and a positive attitude towards use of interpreter services. Regarding quality of care, language barriers created safety risks for the patients, made patients feel unsafe, or delayed patient contact with the healthcare system.
Conclusions:
Immigrant patients and healthcare professionals experience barriers in using interpreter services due to restrictive policies regarding user fees and limitations to entitlement to interpreters, a limited number of qualified interpreters and lack of knowledge. Medical encounters with unaddressed language barriers can put patients at risk and reduce quality of care for immigrants, which calls for strengthening formal and informal access to interpreters.
Council Conclusions on Common values and principles in European Union Health Systems. Official Journal of the European Union;2006.
4.
NørredamMLKrasnikA. Migrants’ access to health services. In: RechelBPhilipaMWalterD (eds) Migration and health in the European Union. London: McGraw-Hill Education (UK), 2011, pp. 67–78.
5.
HarpelundLNielsenSSKrasnikA. Self-perceived need for interpreter among immigrants in Denmark. Scand J Public Health. 2012; 40: 457–465.
6.
PhelanM. Medical interpreting and the law in the European Union. Eur J Health Law. 2012; 19(4): 333–353.
McGarryOHanniganADe AlmeidaMMSeveroniSPuthoopparambilSJMacFarlaneA, et al. What strategies to address communication barriers for refugees and migrants in health care settings have been implemented and evaluated across the WHO European Region? Themed issues on migration and health, IX. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe; 2018.
9.
FloresG. The impact of medical interpreter services on the quality of health care: a systematic review. Med Care Res Rev MCRR. 2005; 62: 255–299.
Federal Office of Public Health. Gesundheit 2020-Health2020-a comprehensive health care strategy. www.gesundheit2030.ch (2013, accessed 8 February 2021).
BoslaughSE. Health care systems around the world: a comparative guide. New York: SAGE; 2013.
15.
LiberatiAAltmanDGTetzlaffJMulrowCGøtzschePCIoannidisJPA, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000100–e1000100.
16.
da Costa Leite BorgesDGuidiCF. Rights of access to healthcare for undocumented migrants: understanding the Italian and British national health systems. Int J Hum Rights Healthc. 2018; 11: 232–243.
17.
HongQNPluyePFàbreguesSBartlettGBoardmanFCargoM, et al. Mixed methods appraisal tool (MMAT) version 2018. McGill University;2018.
18.
World Health Organization; Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. The Right to Health - Factsheet No. 31. 2008.
All European Academies. The European code of conduct for research integrity - revised edition. Berlin: ALLEA; 2017.
21.
KhwajaNSharmaSWongJMurrayDGhoshJMurphyMO, et al. Interpreter services in an inner city teaching hospital: a 6-year experience. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2006; 88: 659–662.
22.
Origlia IkhilorPHasenbergGKurthEAsefawFPehlke-MildeJCignaccoE. Communication barriers in maternity care of allophone migrants: experiences of women, healthcare professionals, and intercultural interpreters. J Adv Nurs. 2019; 75: 2200–2210.
23.
LundinCHadziabdicEHjelmK. Language interpretation conditions and boundaries in multilingual and multicultural emergency healthcare. BMC Int Health Hum Rights. 2018; 18: 23.
24.
DresslerDPilsP. A qualitative study on cross-cultural communication in post-accident in-patient rehabilitation of migrant and ethnic minority patients in Austria. Disabil Rehabil. 2009; 31: 1181–1190.
25.
DaviesMMBathPA. The maternity information concerns of Somali women in the United Kingdom. J Adv Nurs. 2001; 36: 237–245.
26.
CzapkaEAGerwingJSagbakkenM. Invisible rights: barriers and facilitators to access and use of interpreter services in health care settings by Polish migrants in Norway. Scand J Public Health. 2019; 47: 755–764.
27.
Al-SharifiFWinther FrederiksenHKnold RossauHNorredamMZwislerA-D. Access to cardiac rehabilitation and the role of language barriers in the provision of cardiac rehabilitation to migrants. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019; 19: 223.
28.
HahnKSteinhauserJGoetzK. Equity in health care: a qualitative study with refugees, health care professionals, and administrators in one region in Germany. BioMed Res Int. 2020;2020:4647389.
29.
KaleESyedHR. Language barriers and the use of interpreters in the public health services. A questionnaire-based survey. Patient Educ Couns. 2010; 81: 187–191.
30.
MichaëlisCKrasnikANorredamM. Introduction of user fee for language interpretation: effects on use of interpreters in Danish health care. Eur J Public Health. 2021; 31: 705–707.
31.
Korkmaz YaylagülNYaziciS. The perceptions of elderly Turkish immigrants of the health care systems in their home and host countries: A field study focused on Denmark, Britain and Germany. Toplum ve Sosyal Hizmet. 2018;29(2):34–50.
32.
HudelsonPDominice DaoMPernegerTDurieux-PaillardS. A “migrant friendly hospital” initiative in Geneva, Switzerland: evaluation of the effects on staff knowledge and practices. PloS One. 2014; 9: e106758.
33.
HadziabdicE.HeikkilaK.AlbinB.HjelmK. Migrants’ perceptions of using interpreters in health care. Int Nurs Rev. 2009; 56: 461–469.
34.
KrupicFSamuelssonKFatahiNSkoldenbergOSayed-NoorAS. Migrant general practitioners’ experiences of using interpreters in health-care: a qualitative explorative study. Med Arch Sarajevo Bosnia Herzeg. 2017; 71: 42–47.
35.
HadziabdicEAlbinBHjelmK. Arabic-speaking migrants’ attitudes, opinions, preferences and past experiences concerning the use of interpreters in healthcare: a postal cross-sectional survey. BMC Res Notes. 2014; 7: 71.
36.
HadziabdicEHjelmK. Register-based study concerning the problematic situation of using interpreting service in a region in Sweden. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019; 19: 727.
37.
StraitonMLMyhreS. Learning to navigate the healthcare system in a new country: a qualitative study. Scand J Prim Health Care. 2017; 35: 352–359.
38.
TschirhartNDiazEOttersenT. Accessing public healthcare in Oslo, Norway: the experiences of Thai immigrant masseuses. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019; 19:722.
39.
BinderPBornéYJohnsdotterSEssénB. Shared language is essential: communication in a multiethnic obstetric care setting. J Health Commun. 2012; 17: 1171–1186.
40.
van RosseFde BruijneMSuurmondJEssink-BotMLWagnerC. Language barriers and patient safety risks in hospital care: a mixed methods study. Int J Nurs Stud. 2016; 54: 45–53.
41.
MangrioE.Sjogren ForssK. Refugees’ experiences of healthcare in the host country: a scoping review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017; 17: 814.
