THE NEED FOR INTERPRETER SERVICES AND ALTERNATIVE COMMUNICATION STRATEGIES IN PHYSIOTHERAPY DEPARTMENTS TERTIARY PUBLIC HOSPITALS IN PRETORIA, SOUTH AFRICA

Mostert K.¹, Harris A.^1,2, Nowak S.¹, Weideman S.^1,3, Keyser R.¹, Smith M.^1,4, Roets J.^1,2

¹University of Pretoria, Physiotherapy, Pretoria, South Africa, ²Steve Biko Academic Hospital, Physiotherapy, Pretoria, South Africa, ³Pretoria West Hospital, Physiotherapy, Pretoria, South Africa, ⁴Tshwane District Hospital, Pretoria, South Africa

Background: Medical interpreter services as an aid in treatment has been extensively investigated. However, the need for interpreter services from both physiotherapist and patient point of view in one study has not been investigated in the Gauteng Province, South Africa.

Purpose: To obtain the language profiles of both patient and physiotherapist and examine the differences between the two. Additionally, to investigate the opinions of both patient and physiotherapist with regards to language barriers in the absence of an interpreter and the implications on treatment.

Methods: The study had a mixed method research design. The study comprised a quantitative phase whereby an audit took place to investigate home language profile of the patients (n=739) receiving physiotherapy, in contrast to that of the physiotherapists (n=13). The qualitative phase consists of semi-structured interviews with patients (n=11). The interviews were conducted with an interpreter present. Structured mixed questionnaires were distributed to the physiotherapists (n=13) to complete. Explanatory coding was performed manually.

Results: The physiotherapists’ home languages were predominantly Afrikaans and English. Patients, on the other hand, mostly spoke Afrikaans, Sepedi and isiZulu. All physiotherapists experienced a language barrier during their careers with nine (69%) of the physiotherapists experiencing language barriers on a daily basis. The frequency of language barriers were reported by the physiotherapists as follows: The need for interpreter services was highly recommended by the majority of physiotherapists (77%) and patients (73%) participating in the study. Nine females and two male patients were interviewed during the qualitative phase. The average age was 55 years. Interviews were conducted with four seSotho and isiZulu speakers, one Ndebele speaker and two Sepedi speaking patients. The themes identified were as follows: - Feelings when communication was impaired due to physiotherapist-patient barrier - The impact of the language barrier on treatment - The need for shared decision making - Current strategies used to improve communication

Conclusion(s): The language profiles of physiotherapist and their clients in the Pretoria setting is not well aligned. Language barriers were therefore a reality and had negative implications on treatment for physiotherapists and patients alike.

Implications: Workshops for healthcare practitioners are recommended, in addition to standardized gesture charts, multi-lingual ward hand-outs and behaviour modification hand-outs from physiotherapists. The implementation of professional interpreter services was recommended, but the practical feasibility there-of requires further investigation.

Funding acknowledgements: No funding were obtained from external sources to carry out this research.

Topic: Professional issues

Ethics approval: Ethics approval was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Pretoria, South Africa.

All authors, affiliations and abstracts have been published as submitted.