ID-5184 Wonca Abstracts supplement L-Z 13-10-23 - Flipbook - Page 22
WONCA 2023 Supplement 2: WONCA 2023 abstracts (L–Z)
L
M
N
Australian GP registrars and consultations in languages
other than English: A love–hate relationship.
O
Dr Sze Ah Lee1, Prof Parker Magin2,3, Andrew Davey2,3, Alison Fielding2,3, A/Prof Penny Abbott1
P
1
Department of General Practice, School of Medicine, Western Sydney University, 2School of Medicine
and Public Health, University of Newcastle, 3The Royal Australian College of General Practitioners
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
It is recognised that ethnic or linguistic minorities shall not be denied the right to use their
own language.
In Australia, one in every 10 people does not speak English well and one in every 14 GP registrars have
consulted in languages other than English (LOTE); however, this is not recognised practice during GP
training in Australia and not addressed during training.
This qualitative study, as part of a wider project including a quantitative study, aims to better
understand the characteristics and impact of consulting in LOTE on registrars during GP training.
Registrars were recruited by an email via GP Synergy, a regional training organisation, and those who
self-identified as having consulted in LOTE were invited to explore their experiences. Semistructured
interviews were conducted and reflexive thematic analysis applied to the data.
Interviews were undertaken with 15 registrars, of whom five were international medical graduates and
10 were Australian graduates. Their postgraduate experience ranged between four and 23 years, and
the current training term ranged from term 1 to fellowship. Registrars report training at rural, remote
and metropolitan areas.
Registrars did not feel that their LOTE consulting was an impediment to their training. They
experienced both satisfaction and stress when consulting in LOTE, with most registrars reporting
it was cognitively draining. Ambivalence as to whether it was desirable or permissible to undertake
LOTE consultations during training was common. Registrars’ experiences were affected by their
language confidence, particularly the language of their medical education. It could increase doctor–
patient affinity and understanding within the consultation, but for some registrars it was seen as an
unwelcome responsibility in patient care, including creating medicolegal concerns. No registrars had
discussed these experiences and concerns with educators or GP supervisors.
The implications for registrar training will be discussed, including related to professional identity
formation and linguistic rights.
20