ObjectivesAdvances in biopsychosocial science have underlined the importance of taking social history and life course perspective into consideration in primary care. For both clinical and research purposes, this study aims to develop and validate a standardised instrument measuring both material and social deprivation at an individual level.MethodsWe identified relevant potential questions regarding deprivation using a systematic review, structured interviews, focus group interviews and a think-aloud approach. Item response theory analysis was then used to reduce the length of the 38-item questionnaire and derive the deprivation in primary care questionnaire (DiPCare-Q) index using data obtained from a random sample of 200 patients during their planned visits to an ambulatory general internal medicine clinic. Patients completed the questionnaire a second time over the phone 3 days later to enable us to assess reliability. Content validity of the DiPCare-Q was then assessed by 17 general practitioners. Psychometric properties and validity of the final instrument were investigated in a second set of patients. The DiPCare-Q was administered to a random sample of 1898 patients attending one of 47 different private primary care practices in western Switzerland along with questions on subjective social status, education, source of income, welfare status and subjective poverty.ResultsDeprivation was defined in three distinct dimensions: material (eight items), social (five items) and health deprivation (three items). Item consistency was high in both the derivation (Kuder-Richardson Formula 20 (KR20) =0.827) and the validation set (KR20 =0.778). The DiPCare-Q index was reliable (interclass correlation coefficients=0.847) and was correlated to subjective social status (rs=−0.539).ConclusionThe DiPCare-Q is a rapid, reliable and validated instrument that may prove useful for measuring both material and social deprivation in primary care.

On-site HIV counselling and testing is acceptable among clients of FSW in this urban setting. These individuals represent an unquantified population, a proportion of which has an incomplete understanding of HIV risk in the face of high-risk behaviour, with implications for potential onward transmission to non-commercial sexual partners.

BackgroundClients of street sex workers may be at higher risk for HIV infection than the general population. Furthermore, there is a lack of knowledge regarding HIV testing of clients of sex workers in developed countries.MethodThis pilot study assessed the feasibility and acceptance of rapid HIV testing by the clients of street-based sex workers in Lausanne, Switzerland. For 5 evenings, clients in cars were stopped by trained field staff for face-to-face interviews focusing on sex-related HIV risk behaviors and HIV testing history. The clients were then offered a free anonymous rapid HIV test in a bus parked nearby. Rapid HIV testing and counselling were performed by experienced nurse practitioners. Clients with reactive tests were offered confirmatory testing, medical evaluation, and care in our HIV clinic.ResultWe intercepted 144 men, 112 (77.8%) agreed to be interviewed. Among them, 50 (46.6%) had never been tested for HIV. A total of 31 (27.7%) rapid HIV tests were performed, 16 (51.6%) in clients who had not previously been tested. None were reactive. Initially, 19 (16.9%) additional clients agreed to HIV testing but later declined due to the 40-minute queue for testing.ConclusionThis pilot study showed that rapid HIV testing in the red light district of Lausanne was feasible, and that the clients of sex workers accepted testing at an unexpectedly high rate. This setting seems particularly appropriate for targeted HIV screening, since more than 40% of the clients had not previously been tested for HIV even though they engaged in sex-related HIV risk behaviour.

Psychiatric assessments of non-native migrant patients facilitated by an interpreter pose specific communication challenges to all participants. In this study, we developed an original interdisciplinary approach to the verbal and non-verbal practices in this triadic activity. The aim was a data-based description of challenges for clinicians and interpreters, and the identification of relevant strategies. We filmed, transcribed and translated 10 interpreter-mediated consultations focused on the psychiatric assessment of the patient. Subsequently, we submitted the consultations to clinical, interactional sociolinguistic, and interdisciplinary analyses. We identified six challenges for interpreters and clinicians engaged in psychiatric assessments: barely comprehensible and confusing speech, speech about emotions and subjective perceptions, sensitive remarks in relational terms, conclusive clinician interventions, interruptions during interpreter renditions, and non-verbal communication. Attempts by the interpreter to avoid relational offenses (protection of positive face) and to defend the participants’ autonomy (protection of negative face) play a major role in these challenges. So does an insufficient awareness of mutual needs by the clinician and the interpreter. We identified specific strategies of inter-professional metacommunication for each challenge. Clinicians and interpreters should be aware of the challenges they may face in triadic psychiatric assessments. They should take a reflexive stance towards their common practices and may consider using metacommunication tools to reach better communicational and clinical outcomes.