Hepatitis B Among the Khmer: Issues of Translation and Concepts of Illness

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:To assess the comprehensibility of hepatitis B translations for Cambodian refugees, to identify Cambodian illnesses that include the symptoms of hepatitis, and to combine these observations with critical theoretical perspectives of language to reflect on the challenges of medical translation generally. DESIGN:Open-ended, semistructured interviews, and participant-observation of a refugee community in Seattle, Washington. SETTING:Homes of Cambodian residents of inner-city neighborhoods. PARTICIPANTS:Thirty-four adult Cambodian refugees who had each been educated about hepatitis B through public health outreach. RESULTS:Medical interpreters translated hepatitis B as rauk tlaam , literally "liver disease." Unfortunately, while everyone knew of the liver ( tlaam ), rauk tlaam was a meaningless term to 28 (82%) of 34 respondents and conveyed none of the chronicity and communicability intended by refugee health workers for 34 (100%) of the respondents. In contrast, all respondents knew illnesses named after symptom complexes that include the symptoms of acute and chronic hepatitis, but do not refer to diseased organs. The Cambodian words chosen to translate hepatitis B reflect the medical thinking and medical authority that can unintentionally overwhelm attempts at meaningful communication with non-Englishspeaking patients. CONCLUSIONS:To improve comprehension of hepatitis B translations for the Khmer, translators must choose between medical terminology focused on the liver and Khmer terminology which identifies recognizable experiences, but represents important Khmer health concepts. A critical linguistic view of this situation suggests that for these translations to be meaningful clinicians and health educators must first analyze and then monitor the contextual significance of medical language. In cross-cultural settings, this means a partnership with medical interpreters to pay close attention to the experience of illness and social context of the translation.

Is sex lost in translation? Linguistic and conceptual issues in the translation of sexual and reproductive health surveys

“…For example, throughout our translation process, compromises were made during language harmonisation and the balance between lay and professional languages. Similar to our findings, Jackson et al (1997) reflected on the mismatch between the lay and medical translation of hepatitis B in Khmer. They argued that target populations' illness experience and social context should be considered during translation.…”

The Need for More Research on Language Barriers in Health Care: A Proposed Research Agenda

“…Similarly, 57 of the 151 articles focused exclusively on Spanish. While Spanish is the most common language, after English, spoken in the United States, given its similarity to English in grammatical structure and medical concepts, findings based on the sole study of Spanish may not be generalizable to languages such as Hmong, which only recently acquired a written language (Barrett et al 1998), or Cambodian, which does not have an equivalent word for hepatitis ( Jackson et al 1997). Ethnic groups' cultural and demographic differences could also lead to different findings.…”

Improving patient–provider communication: insights from interpreters

“…[1][2][3][4] Such differences can lead to communication problems and can have important consequences for care. [5][6][7] It is important for physicians to be aware of potential cross-cultural communication barriers, and learn the skills necessary to overcome them.…”