Skip to main content

Table 3 Open text questions about interpreter use, responses and emergent themes

From: Barriers to the use of trained interpreters in consultations with refugees in four resettlement countries: a qualitative analysis using normalisation process theory

Open-ended question Number of free text responses/total number of responses Emergent themes*
What negative impact have you observed? n = 153 (of 187) 81%
Canada n = 24 (of 28)
USA n = 35 (of 40)
Ireland n = 66 (of 80)
Australia n = 25 (of 33)
Other n = 3 (of 6)
(1). Inhibits the relationship between patient and provider
(2). Too time-consuming
(3). Interpreters not translating directly/properly
(4). Interpreters overstepping their role
(5). Concerns about breach of confidentiality
(6). Background of interpreter not suitable
(7). Costs
(8). Technical problems
(9). Patients refuse interpreter
Please write any other information you would like to provide.† Total number of comments/responses to this question: n = 89 (of 187)
Number of responses by country:
Canada n = 11 (of 28)
USA n = 15 (of 40)
Ireland n = 41 (of 80)
Australia n = 18 (of 33)
Other n = 4 (of 6
(1). No access to formal interpreter services
(2). Recommendations for changes in policy and practice
(3). Comments/feedback on the survey
(4). Problems with implementing interpreter services
(5). Positive impact of using interpreter services
  1. * The themes are numbered according to the number of responses that were coded for that theme, starting with the themes with the highest density
  2. † Some responses to this question raised issues regarding the negative impact of using interpreter services and were coded into the themes that emerged from question 1