PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 14651714

Translating clinical tools in nursing practice.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The widespread use of clinical tools in nursing practice reflects their usefulness in guiding patient care, evaluating treatment effectiveness and conducting audit. Cultural awareness and the provision of culturally competent care is a high priority for nurses in the United Kingdom (UK), given patterns of increasing ethnic diversity. However, meeting the individual needs of patients can be difficult when language barriers hinder communication. One way to address these difficulties is to translate existing clinical tools. AIM: The aim of this paper is to appraise the potential for, and limitations of, translating clinical tools for use in nursing practice. DISCUSSION: Drawing on a range of studies from the disciplines of health and social science, this review describes and discusses some key considerations relevant to translating clinical tools in nursing. These considerations include the need to ensure cultural equivalence, lack of familiarity with clinical tool formats in some cultures and its impact on responses, and low literacy levels in some populations. CONCLUSION: Clinical tools provide benefits in identifying patients' problems, guiding patient care, and evaluating treatments and interventions. Translating these tools can help to bridge the language gap that hinders good communication between nurses and patients. Translated clinical tools can be of acceptable cultural equivalence and validity if high quality translation methodologies are employed, together with an awareness of culturally relevant issues when interpreting the information gained from the tools.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Maria Dunckley, Rhidian Hughes, Julia M Addington-Hall, Irene J Higginson. 2003. Translating clinical tools in nursing practice.. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0309-2402.2003.02821.x

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Communicative and strategic action in interpreted consultations in primary health care: a Habermasian perspective.

We report a qualitative study of accounts of interpreted consultations in UK primary care. The study sought to explore how three Habermasian tensions between (a) system and lifeworld, (b) communicative and strategic action, and (c) interpersonal and macropolitical spheres played out in the triadic consultation between clinician, interpreter and patient. In a total of 69 individual interviews and two focus groups, we collected narratives from service users (through interpreters or bilingual researchers), interpreters and doctors and other staff in general practice. We recorded, transcribed and analysed these, taking the story as the main unit of analysis. Our data suggest that the preconditions for communicative action are rarely met in the interpreted consultation. The interpreter's presence makes a dyadic interaction into a triad, adding considerable complexity to the social situation and generating operational and technical challenges. Lack of trust, intense pressure of time, mismatch of agendas (biomedical versus lifeworld), firm expectations of a specific outcome (e.g. referral, prescription) and profound power imbalances all promote strategic action (i.e. speech that seeks consciously or unconsciously to manipulate an outcome) rather than communicative action (i.e. sincere efforts to achieve understanding, and reach consensus) by all parties. In consultations interpreted by family members (an option traditionally seen as 'second best' by policy makers), the social situation is very different. Family members are generally trusted, share the lifeworld agenda, and shift the power balance in the patient's favour. The interpreter occupies multiple social roles, including translator, interpersonal mediator, system mediator, educator, advocate, and link worker. The essence of professionalism in interpreting is shifting judiciously between these potentially conflicting roles. We discuss the implications of our findings for communication with limited English speakers in healthcare consultations and for realizing contemporary policy goals such as concordance, shared decision-making, empowerment, and choice.

Communication Barriers↗