Dementia assessment requires functional communication and interaction between healthcare professionals and the patient being assessed. These can be affected by the requirement for an interpreter to communicate with the patient. The purpose of this study was to elucidate the interactions between patient, healthcare professionals and interpreter, focusing on the role of the interpreter and the challenges that may arise in interpreter-mediated dementia assessment. The study had an ethnographic design in which the data consisted of audio and video recordings of 19 dementia assessments conducted in the presence of an interpreter. The data were analyzed using the constant comparative method. The results showed that the interpreter could affect the patient’s performance and results during the dementia assessment. The interpreter could alter the meaning and content of what was communicated, sometimes change information and instructions exchanged between the patient and healthcare professionals, could avoid interpreting everything being said, and occasionally made their own corrections to what was being communicated. This occurred mainly because of the interpreter’s lack of linguistic skills and the interpreter failing to adhere to the ethical guidelines governing their profession. These challenges could also occur when the interpreter was not familiar with the context of dementia assessment. Alterations made by the interpreter to what was being communicated could lead to incorrect evaluation of the patient’s cognitive abilities and health status. This, in turn, may lead to misjudgment of the patient’s remaining resources and symptoms and their required treatment and support.
Background: The number of people with a migration background and dementia is increasing in Europe. All patients with suspected dementia have the right to an appropriate cognitive assessment and correct diagnosis for optimal treatment and support. Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale (RUDAS) cognitive screening instrument is less affected by language, culture, and educational background, and adapted for use in multicultural populations. Objective: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of RUDAS-S to the Swedish version of Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE-SR) for detecting dementia in a multicultural group of outpatients in Swedish memory clinics. Methods: We tested 123 outpatients (36 nonnative Swedish), in 4 memory clinics in Southern Sweden with RUDAS-S to supplement the usual cognitive assessment. Results: RUDAS-S had moderate to good diagnostic performance for detecting dementia in a multicultural population in Sweden, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.81. At a cutoff score <25 its sensitivity was 0.92, specificity 0.60, and accuracy 76% . The AUC for the MMSE-SR was 0.79. At a cutoff score <23 its sensitivity was 0.65, specificity 0.81, and accuracy 73% . Conclusion: RUDAS-S is at least as accurate as MMSE-SR for detecting dementia in memory clinics in Sweden and can be used for all patients undergoing a cognitive assessment, irrespective of their cultural, language, and educational background. However, there is a need for other cross-cultural cognitive tests to complement RUDAS-S to extend cognitive examination.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.