The experiences of general practitioners regarding communication with patients from different cultural backgrounds and/or low socio-economic status: a qualitative interview study
Zwinkels, D. N.; Bijl, H. A.; van Linschoten, R. C. A.
Show abstract
IntroductionEffective communication between general practitioners (GPs) and patients is essential for high-quality healthcare, improved patient outcomes and physician satisfaction. However communication barriers related to cultural differences and low socio-economic status (SES) can negatively impact patient care. This study explores the experiences of GPs in navigating communication challenges with patients from diverse cultural and socio-economic backgrounds, aiming to identify strategies to improve these interactions. MethodsThis study used a qualitative phenomenological approach to explore GPs experiences with communication challenges with patients from diverse cultural backgrounds and/or low socioeconomic status. Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with GPs from Jans Huisartsen, a general practice in Rotterdam. Data were analyzed with thematic analysis. ResultsA total of 13 GPs from Jans Huisartsen were interviewed. Key challenges included language barriers, different expectations, and different cultural norms. Consequences of communication challenges included misunderstanding, lower medication adherence, less shared decision-making, and decreased patient satisfaction. To improve communication, GPs employed strategies such as simplifying language, using translators, and personalizing consultations. ConclusionThis study highlights the experiences of GPs regarding how cultural diversity and SES affect effective communication. The results underline the importance of addressing specific challenges faced by these patients, particularly by fostering shared decision making and re-evaluating the role of family translators. Enhancing GP training on communication with culturally diverse patients or patients with low SES and promoting the use of professional translators could improve patient understanding, adherence and satisfaction, ultimately contributing to more equitable and effective healthcare for these vulnerable populations.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Implementation of predictive risk stratification to reduce emergency admissions to hospital: experiences of general practitioners and practice managers 96%
- Impact of COVID-19 on Migrants’ Access to Primary Care: A National Qualitative Study 96%
- Factors influencing focused practice: A qualitative study of resident and early-career family physician practice choices 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- COVI-Prim survey: Challenges for Austrian and German general practitioners during initial phase of COVID-19 96%
- Factors influencing referral to maternity models of care in Australian general practice 95%
- Wading through Molasses: A qualitative examination of the experiences, perceptions, attitudes, and knowledge of Australian medical practitioners regarding medical billing 95%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Pre-Post Analysis of the Impact of British Columbia Nurse Practitioner Primary Care Clinics on Patient Health and Care Experience 95%
- What is the suitability of clinical vignettes in benchmarking the performance of online symptom checkers? An audit study 95%
- Adverse event reviews in healthcare: What matters to patients and their family? A qualitative study exploring the perspective of patients and family 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- “I don’t know what to do or where to go”. Experiences of accessing healthcare support from the perspectives of people living with Long Covid and healthcare professionals: A qualitative study in Bradford, UK 96%
- Challenges of visibility and inclusion in Long COVID: a population-based interview study 94%
- Patients’ and carers’ experiences of, and engagement with remote home monitoring services for COVID-19 patients: a rapid mixed-methods study 94%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.