{"title":"聋人患者在临床环境中的首选交流方式:对医疗服务提供者的影响","authors":"Sarah Hall, Michael Ballard","doi":"10.1093/deafed/enad061","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Deaf patients who communicate in American Sign Language (ASL) experience communication challenges leading to medical errors, treatment delays, and health disparities. Research on Deaf patient communication preferences is sparse. Researchers conducted focus groups based on the Health Belief Model with culturally Deaf patients and interpreters. The ASL focus groups were interpreted and transcribed into written English, verified by a third-party interpreting agency, and uploaded into NVivo. Deductive coding was used to identify communication methods and inductive coding was used to identify themes within each. Writing back-and-forth introduced challenges related to English proficiency, medical terminology, poor penmanship, and tendencies of providers to abbreviate. Participants had various speechreading abilities and described challenges with mask mandates. Multiple issues were identified with family and friends as proxy interpreters, including a lack of training, confidentiality issues, emotional support, and patient autonomy. Video remote interpreter challenges included technical, environmental, and interpreter qualification concerns. Participants overwhelmingly preferred on-site interpreters for communication clarity. While there was a preference for direct care, many acknowledged this is not always feasible due to lack of providers fluent in ASL. Access to on-site interpreters is vital for many Deaf patients to provide full access to critical medical information. Budget allocation for on-call interpreters is important in emergency settings.","PeriodicalId":47768,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education","volume":"43 3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Deaf patients’ preferred communication in clinical settings: implications for healthcare providers\",\"authors\":\"Sarah Hall, Michael Ballard\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/deafed/enad061\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Deaf patients who communicate in American Sign Language (ASL) experience communication challenges leading to medical errors, treatment delays, and health disparities. Research on Deaf patient communication preferences is sparse. Researchers conducted focus groups based on the Health Belief Model with culturally Deaf patients and interpreters. The ASL focus groups were interpreted and transcribed into written English, verified by a third-party interpreting agency, and uploaded into NVivo. Deductive coding was used to identify communication methods and inductive coding was used to identify themes within each. Writing back-and-forth introduced challenges related to English proficiency, medical terminology, poor penmanship, and tendencies of providers to abbreviate. Participants had various speechreading abilities and described challenges with mask mandates. Multiple issues were identified with family and friends as proxy interpreters, including a lack of training, confidentiality issues, emotional support, and patient autonomy. Video remote interpreter challenges included technical, environmental, and interpreter qualification concerns. Participants overwhelmingly preferred on-site interpreters for communication clarity. While there was a preference for direct care, many acknowledged this is not always feasible due to lack of providers fluent in ASL. Access to on-site interpreters is vital for many Deaf patients to provide full access to critical medical information. Budget allocation for on-call interpreters is important in emergency settings.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47768,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education\",\"volume\":\"43 3 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/enad061\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SPECIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/enad061","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
使用美国手语 (ASL) 交流的聋人患者在交流方面面临挑战,导致医疗失误、治疗延误和健康差异。有关聋人患者沟通偏好的研究很少。研究人员根据健康信念模型,与聋人患者和翻译进行了焦点小组讨论。ASL 焦点小组被翻译并转录为书面英语,经第三方翻译机构验证后上传到 NVivo。演绎编码用于确定交流方式,归纳编码用于确定每种交流方式的主题。来回书写带来了英语水平、医学术语、书写能力差以及医疗服务提供者倾向于缩写等方面的挑战。参与者有不同的语音阅读能力,并描述了戴口罩时遇到的挑战。亲友作为代理口译员存在多种问题,包括缺乏培训、保密问题、情感支持和患者自主权。视频远程口译员面临的挑战包括技术、环境和口译员资格方面的问题。绝大多数参与者倾向于使用现场口译员,以提高沟通的清晰度。虽然与会者倾向于直接护理,但许多人承认,由于缺乏精通 ASL 的医疗服务提供者,这并不总是可行的。对于许多聋人患者来说,获得现场口译员的帮助至关重要,这样他们才能充分获得关键的医疗信息。为随叫随到的口译人员分配预算在急诊环境中非常重要。
Deaf patients’ preferred communication in clinical settings: implications for healthcare providers
Deaf patients who communicate in American Sign Language (ASL) experience communication challenges leading to medical errors, treatment delays, and health disparities. Research on Deaf patient communication preferences is sparse. Researchers conducted focus groups based on the Health Belief Model with culturally Deaf patients and interpreters. The ASL focus groups were interpreted and transcribed into written English, verified by a third-party interpreting agency, and uploaded into NVivo. Deductive coding was used to identify communication methods and inductive coding was used to identify themes within each. Writing back-and-forth introduced challenges related to English proficiency, medical terminology, poor penmanship, and tendencies of providers to abbreviate. Participants had various speechreading abilities and described challenges with mask mandates. Multiple issues were identified with family and friends as proxy interpreters, including a lack of training, confidentiality issues, emotional support, and patient autonomy. Video remote interpreter challenges included technical, environmental, and interpreter qualification concerns. Participants overwhelmingly preferred on-site interpreters for communication clarity. While there was a preference for direct care, many acknowledged this is not always feasible due to lack of providers fluent in ASL. Access to on-site interpreters is vital for many Deaf patients to provide full access to critical medical information. Budget allocation for on-call interpreters is important in emergency settings.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education is a peer-reviewed scholarly journal integrating and coordinating basic and applied research relating to individuals who are deaf, including cultural, developmental, linguistic, and educational topics. JDSDE addresses issues of current and future concern to allied fields, encouraging interdisciplinary discussion. The journal promises a forum that is timely, of high quality, and accessible to researchers, educators, and lay audiences. Instructions for contributors appear at the back of each issue.