Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34488719›Full record

Trial reportBMC health services research2021

Response to language barriers with patients from refugee background in general practice in Australia: findings from the OPTIMISE study.

Shoko Saito, Mark F Harris, Katrina M Long, Virginia Lewis, Sue Casey, William Hogg, I-Hao Cheng, Jenny Advocat, Geraldine Marsh, Nilakshi Gunatillaka and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC health services research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
9.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Refugee and migrants' involvement in participatory spaces in a US practice-based research network study: Responding to unanticipated priorities.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Shoko SaitoCentre for Primary Health Care and Equity, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, New South Wales, Kensington, Australia.
Mark F HarrisCentre for Primary Health Care and Equity, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, New South Wales, Kensington, Australia. m.f.harris@unsw.edu.au.
Katrina M LongDepartment of General Practice, School of Primary & Allied Health Care, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Victoria, Melbourne, Australia.
Virginia LewisCentre for Health Systems Development, Australian Institute for Primary Care and Ageing, La Trobe University, Victoria, Melbourne, Australia.
Sue CaseyVictorian Foundation for Survivors of Torture, Brunswick, Australia.
William HoggDepartment of Family Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.
I-Hao ChengDepartment of General Practice, School of Primary & Allied Health Care, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Victoria, Melbourne, Australia.
Jenny AdvocatDepartment of General Practice, School of Primary & Allied Health Care, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Victoria, Melbourne, Australia.
Geraldine MarshCentre for Health Systems Development, Australian Institute for Primary Care and Ageing, La Trobe University, Victoria, Melbourne, Australia.
Nilakshi GunatillakaDepartment of General Practice, School of Primary & Allied Health Care, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Victoria, Melbourne, Australia.
Grant RussellDepartment of General Practice, School of Primary & Allied Health Care, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Victoria, Melbourne, Australia.
Monash University · AULa Trobe University · AUUNSW Sydney · AUMyer Foundation · AUUniversity of Ottawa · CA

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council APP1106372
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLanguage is a barrier to many patients from refugee backgrounds accessing and receiving quality primary health care. This paper examines the way general practices address these barriers and how this changed following a practice facilitation intervention.

methodsThe OPTIMISE study was a stepped wedge cluster randomised trial set within 31 general practices in three urban regions in Australia with high refugee settlement. It involved a practice facilitation intervention addressing interpreter engagement as one of four core intervention areas. This paper analysed quantitative and qualitative data from the practices and 55 general practitioners from these, collected at baseline and after 6 months during which only those assigned to the early group received the intervention.

resultsMany practices (71 %) had at least one GP who spoke a language spoken by recent humanitarian entrants. At baseline, 48 % of practices reported using the government funded Translating and Interpreting Service (TIS). The role of reception staff in assessing and recording the language and interpreter needs of patients was well defined. However, they lacked effective systems to share the information with clinicians. After the intervention, the number of practices using the TIS increased. However, family members and friends continued to be used to interpret with GPs reporting patients preferred this approach. The extra time required to arrange and use interpreting services remained a major barrier.

conclusionsIn this study a whole of practice facilitation intervention resulted in improvements in procedures for and engagement of interpreters. However, there were barriers such as the extra time required, and family members continued to be used. Based on these findings, further effort is needed to reduce the administrative burden and GP's opportunity cost needed to engage interpreters, to provide training for all staff on when and how to work with interpreters and discuss and respond to patient concerns about interpreting services.

Indexed as

General PracticeRefugeesAustraliaCommunication BarriersHumansTranslatingGeneral PracticeInterpreter useLanguage barriersPractice-wide facilitationRefugees

Identifiers

PMID34488719
PMCPMC8419978
OpenAlexW3198678310

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.