Exploring patient preference regarding interpreter use in primary care

Background Effective communication is considered an essential component of delivering health care. Trained, professional interpreters are the gold standard for overcoming language barriers with those with limited English proficiency (LEP). However, LEP patients often use unqualified interpreters such as family members and friends. Existing literature explores the rationale behind choosing different interpreters, but rarely from the patient perspective.

Aim To explore the patient perspective on the type of interpreter best suited for primary care consultations.

Method Participants self-identified as having LEP were recruited from four GP practices in areas of Sheffield with high proportions of black and minority ethnic (BME) residents. The participants were from Urdu-, Arabic-, or Romani-speaking ethnic groups. Semi-structured interpreted interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analysed thematically with independent verification of emergent themes. Interviews continued to data saturation.

Results All participants expressed a preference for face-to-face interpreters. Urdu and Arabic participants highlighted the importance of using an interpreter with the same dialect; Roma participants were passionate about the need for qualified Roma interpreters. Most participants also identified trust and sex as important factors. However, interpreter preference varied between participants: some valued the continuity of family members, whereas others favoured the professionalism and linguistic accuracy associated with qualified interpreters.

Conclusion This study identified conflicts between patient preferences and guidance for healthcare professionals; all of the participants disliked telephone interpreting, and many recognised the benefits of untrained interpreters. The study highlights the complexities of interpreter preference in primary care and suggests that the decision should be flexible, and patient centred.