Hope and harm: a delicate balance. Death and dying in multicultural Australia

Barriers to effective perioperative communication in indigenous Australians: an audit of progress since 1996

This prospective study was designed to elucidate barriers limiting effective perioperative communication between indigenous Australians and anaesthetists, and to identify strategies for improving communication. A questionnaire was used to collect data on 1040 consecutive patients undergoing anaesthesia at Royal Darwin Hospital between February and March 2003. 27.1% of these patients described themselves as Aboriginal. Aboriginal patients were more likely to undergo emergency surgery and were more likely to be classified as ASA 3, 4 or 5 than non-indigenous patients. Communication difficulties were identified in 28.7% of all Aboriginal patients, which was 31 times higher than those in non-Aboriginal patients. The most common reason identified for this was difficulty in speaking English. Only 17.7% of Aboriginal patients presenting to the operating theatre spoke English as their first language. Unfortunately, the anaesthetic team utilized the Aboriginal interpreter service in only a minority of cases. Communication difficulty in indigenous Australians is pervasive and often goes unrecognized. The results suggest that heath care providers may need staff training in cross-cultural communication and that protocols need to be developed within the health care system so that interpreters are called upon automatically early in the admission process.

Sharing the true stories: improving communication between Aboriginal patients and healthcare workers

OBJECTIVES

To identify factors limiting the effectiveness of communication between Aboriginal patients with end-stage renal disease and healthcare workers, and to identify strategies for improving communication.

DESIGN

Qualitative study, gathering data through (a) videotaped interactions between patients and staff, and (b) in-depth interviews with all participants, in their first language, about their perceptions of the interaction, their interpretation of the video record and their broader experience with intercultural communication.

SETTING

A satellite dialysis unit in suburban Darwin, Northern Territory. The interactions occurred between March and July 2001.

PARTICIPANTS

Aboriginal patients from the Yolngu language group of north-east Arnhem Land and their medical, nursing and allied professional carers.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Factors influencing the quality of communication.

RESULTS

A shared understanding of key concepts was rarely achieved. Miscommunication often went unrecognised. Sources of miscommunication included lack of patient control over the language, timing, content and circumstances of interactions; differing modes of discourse; dominance of biomedical knowledge and marginalisation of Yolngu knowledge; absence of opportunities and resources to construct a body of shared understanding; cultural and linguistic distance; lack of staff training in intercultural communication; and lack of involvement of trained interpreters.

CONCLUSIONS

Miscommunication is pervasive. Trained interpreters provide only a partial solution. Fundamental change is required for Aboriginal patients to have significant input into the management of their illness. Educational resources are needed to facilitate a shared understanding, not only of renal physiology, disease and treatment, but also of the cultural, social and economic dimensions of the illness experience of Aboriginal people.