BACKGROUND: Hepatocellular carcinoma is a burdensome form of liver cancer with an increasing global prevalence. Emerging evidence has shown that early palliative care introduction at diagnosis of any life-limiting illness improves patient and carer outcomes. Despite this, patients with hepatocellular carcinoma usually receive palliative care late. These patients are important stakeholders in the provision of palliative care, but their perceived barriers regarding its delivery are poorly defined.
OBJECTIVE: This pilot study aimed to identify the barriers perceived by patients to integrating palliative care into the hepatocellular carcinoma treatment algorithm.
METHODS: Patients living with hepatocellular carcinoma undertook semi-structured interviews about their perceptions of palliative care. We compared these perceptions before and after providing a brief explanation of palliative care. Interview data was inductively coded in NVivo 12 (2018) and thematically analysed.
RESULTS: Twenty-one patients were interviewed. 16 perceived palliative care to mean end-of-life therapy, and nine participants had no prior knowledge of palliative care. After hearing a definition of palliative care, 17 participants reported changed positive attitudes. Seven participants supported a name change, including four participants who continued to reject palliative care following the explanation due to the negative stigma associated with the term \'palliative care\'.
CONCLUSIONS: There is significant misperception about the purpose of palliative care among patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, constituting a barrier to early integration. This can be feasibly addressed with a two-folded educational and renaming initiative to dispel patient misconceptions regarding palliative care. Effective strategies to achieve this should be developed and tested with relevant stakeholders, particularly patients.

BACKGROUND: A growing body of research is examining how healthcare systems are responding to the increasing numbers of migrants and the resulting superdiversity of patients. The aim of this article is to identify and explain communication barriers in the provision of healthcare to Ukrainian war refugees in the Czech Republic from the perspectives of healthcare professionals and intercultural mediators.
METHODS: The exploratory case study is based on a qualitative analysis of semi-structured interviews with frontline health professionals: 20 with doctors and 10 with nurses. The second source of data is two focus groups aimed at capturing communication problems from the perspective of intercultural mediators who accompany refugees to health facilities. The interview transcripts and FGs were analysed using six-stage thematic coding.
RESULTS: The survey identified five main themes related to barriers to communication: (1) language barriers and interpreting, (2) cultural barriers, (3) differing expectations of health and the healthcare systems in the Czech Republic and Ukraine, (4) prejudices and negative attitudes and unethical behaviour towards refugees and migrants and (5) lack of awareness of patient rights.
CONCLUSIONS: The arrival of large numbers of migrants has highlighted deficiencies in the system that may affect other vulnerable groups and the general population. These include the lack of general communication skills and legal awareness among many health professionals, which are barriers to the development of patient-centred care. The involvement of intercultural mediators fundamentally improves communication between health professionals and (not only) migrant patients. Nevertheless, it is necessary to legally anchor and define the position of intercultural mediators within the healthcare system.
UNASSIGNED: Collaboration with intercultural mediators who interpreted the extensive experiences of Ukrainian refugee patients and also have personal experience as migrant or migrant-origin patients contributed to shaping research questions, facilitating study participation and enriching evidence interpretation. Researchers with multicultural backgrounds and experience with working with people from refugee backgrounds were involved in the study design and analysis.

This study investigates the impact of a minority language on international trade. Using the distance to Hunchun as an instrumental variable, and transaction-level customs data from 2000 to 2015, we investigate the causal impact of common Korean language on international trade between Chinese counties and South/North Korea. The results suggest that a 1% increase in the proportion of population speaking Korean will increase value share and transactions share in trade by 1.8% and 2.3%, respectively. These effects are more pronounced in trade with North Korea and in higher trade share regions. Furthermore, we show that the common Korean language exerts its influence through reducing communication barrier. The impact is mainly observed at the extensive margin rather than the intensive margin. These findings highlight the potential of leveraging minority languages to boost bilateral trade in developing countries.

BACKGROUND: Remote (digital and/or telephone) access and consultation models are being driven by national policy with the goal being that the National Health Service operate on a remote-first (digital-first) basis by 2029. Previous research has suggested that remote methods of access to care and consulting may act to widen health inequalities for certain patients and/or groups such as those from ethnic minorities. South Asian (SA) patients comprise the largest ethnic minority group in England. Understanding the experiences and needs of this group is critical to ensuring that general practice can deliver equitable, quality health care.
METHODS: Qualitative study. 37 participants (from Indian, Pakistani and/or Bangladeshi background) were recruited to take part in either in-person preferred language focus groups or remote semistructured interviews in the English language. Thematic analysis was conducted to identify themes in the qualitative data.
RESULTS: Three major interlinked themes were identified: (1) reduced access, (2) reduced patient choice and (3) quality and safety concerns. The findings highlight access issues split by (i) general issues with appointment access via any remote means and (ii) specific issues related to language barriers creating additional barriers to access and care. Some patients valued the convenience of remote access but also raised concerns regarding appointment availability and reduced patient choice. Face-to-face consultations were preferable but less available. The findings underscore how participants perceived remote care to be of lesser quality and less safe. Concerns were greatest for those with limited English proficiency (LEP), with the removal of non-verbal aspects of communication and \'hands-on\' care leading to perceptions of reduced psycho-social safety.
CONCLUSIONS: SA patients\' experiences of remote-led primary care access and care delivery were negative with only a minority viewing it positively and for certain limited scenarios. Face-to-face models of care remain the preferred mode of consultation, particularly for those with LEP. Hybrid models of access offer patients the greatest choice, and are likely to meet the varying needs of the South-Asian patient population going forwards. The remote first approach to primary care may be achievable as a service ideal, but its limitations need to be recognised and accounted for to ensure that primary care can be an equitable service, both now and in the future.
UNASSIGNED: Members of the public were involved in all phases of research in the study. This included co-working in partnership throughout the study including, reviewing patient-facing documents, recruiting participants, data facilitation, translation work, interpretation of the data and co-authors on this manuscript. The key to the success of our study was collaborative teamwork, which involved experienced members of the public with SA cultural knowledge working together with and integral to the research team for all components.

BACKGROUND: Global migration has led to a sharp increase in the number of language-discordant consultations (LDCs) in healthcare. Evidence on how healthcare providers (HCPs) meet migrant patients\' needs while mitigating language barriers is lacking.
METHODS: Using purposive and snowball sampling, we recruited twenty-seven Dutch HCPs (Mage = 45.07, SD = 11.46) and conducted semi-structured interviews to collect qualitative, open-ended data for identifying the communication strategies used with migrant patients in LDCs. We analysed the transcripts using deductive and inductive approaches (e.g., constant comparative method from Grounded Theory). Final pattern codes (i.e., key themes) were discussed among the research team until mutual agreement had been achieved.
RESULTS: Five key themes emerged from the analyses: HCPs often \'got-by\' with (1) instrumental and (2) affective communication strategies used in language-concordant consultations to start medical consultations. When some instrumental communication strategies were deemed ineffective (e.g., lingua franca, gesturing, etc.) to bridge language barriers, HCPs turned to (3) incorporating digital tools (e.g., Google Translate). When HCPs were unable to communicate with migrant patients at all, (4) informal, ad-hoc and professional interpreters were involved. Finally, HCPs often (5) involved additional support to engage migrant patients to engage in treatment-related behaviours.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results highlight the importance of raising awareness among HCPs about using various combinations of different strategies. The development of a guideline indicating the optimal combination of communication strategies for different medical consultation goals may be useful in reshaping the current communication behaviour of HCPs in LDCs.
UNASSIGNED: HCPs were the study population involved in this qualitative study. Refugee health advisors, general practitioners and linguistic specialists (i.e., members of the Right2Health consortium) with experience with the Dutch healthcare system were involved throughout the development of this research. This includes a review of the research question, participant information sheet and interview topic guide as well as providing interpretations of the data and feedback to this manuscript.

UNASSIGNED: Migration-related factors, such as language barriers, can be relevant to the risk, healthcare and complications of type 2 diabetes in people with a history of migration. Diabetes-related data from people with selected citizenships were analysed on the basis of the nationwide survey German Health Update: Fokus (GEDA Fokus).
UNASSIGNED: The diabetes risk of persons without diabetes (n = 4,698, 18 - 79 years), key figures on healthcare and secondary diseases of persons with type 2 diabetes (n = 326, 45 - 79 years) and on concomitant diseases (n = 326 with type 2 diabetes compared to n = 2,018 without diabetes, 45 - 79 years) were stratified according to sociodemographic and migration-related characteristics.
UNASSIGNED: Better German language proficiency is associated with a lower risk of diabetes. Diabetes-related organ complications are observed more frequently in persons who report experiences of discrimination in the health or care sector. Both persons with and without diabetes are more likely to have depressive symptoms when they reported experiences of discrimination. A stronger sense of belonging to the society in Germany is associated with reporting depressive symptoms less often in people without diabetes, but not in people with type 2 diabetes.
UNASSIGNED: The differences according to migration-related characteristics indicate a need for improvement in the prevention and care of type 2 diabetes. Migration-sensitive indicators should be integrated into the surveillance of diabetes.

Providing equitable, patient-centered oral health care requires the dental community to address the cultural and linguistic needs and preferences of patients and their communities. This report describes our three-part demonstration project, providing an innovative framework and interprofessional approach to enhance language access in oral health care.

BACKGROUND: Asian Americans (AA) face cultural and linguistic barriers to health care access, resulting in poor health outcomes. This study investigates the experiences of AAs using language interpretation services (LIS) in health care settings.
METHODS: Using a mixed-methods approach, we conducted a community survey (N=401) and seven focus groups between April and September 2023. We use the Andersen model to understand the experience around LIS for AAs and calculated descriptive statistics for predisposing (i.e., sociodemographic factors and attitudes toward LIS), enabling (i.e., perceived barriers), and need factors (i.e., perceived need for LIS). Focus groups were analyzed using a modified template approach to text analysis.
RESULTS: Quantitative and qualitative analyses found that although AAs recognize the benefits and need for LIS, various barriers (e.g., lack of interpreters when booking an appointment) preclude these communities from accessing these services.
CONCLUSIONS: Results from this study will help inform interventions that seek to improve LIS within health care systems.

暂无摘要。

OBJECTIVE: Hospitalized families who use languages other than English (LOE) for care encounter unique communication challenges, as do children with medical complexity (CMC). We sought to better understand communication challenges and opportunities to improve care of families who use LOE from the perspectives of hospital staff and Spanish-speaking parents of CMC.
METHODS: This qualitative project involved secondary analysis of transcripts from a study on family safety reporting at 2 quaternary care children\'s hospitals and additional primary data collection (interviews) of staff and parents. Bilingual researchers conducted audio-recorded, semistructured interviews with staff and Spanish-speaking parents of CMC during/after hospitalization. We professionally transcribed and translated interviews and developed, iteratively refined, and validated a codebook. Three independent researchers coded interviews using qualitative descriptive methodology and identified emerging themes through thematic analysis.
RESULTS: We coded 49 interviews (13 parents, 11 physicians, 13 nurses, 6 allied health professionals, 6 leaders). Five themes emerged: (1) assumptions and bias regarding specific groups who use LOE for care, (2) importance of trust and relationships, (3) importance of language-concordant care, (4) workarounds to address communication challenges, and (5) the \"double-edged\" sword of technology. Participant-suggested strategies to improve communication included increasing interpreter access for parents and staff, optimizing technology use, and minimizing bias and assumptions through training.
CONCLUSIONS: Parents of CMC and staff identified challenges and opportunities related to communicating with hospitalized families who use LOE for care. Solutions to improve communication and safety for these families should be attuned to needs of all parties involved.