Healthcare professionals’ experiences and perspectives of team-based interdisciplinary pain rehabilitation with immigrants requiring an interpreter. A qualitative study

Figures & data

Table 1. The interview guide, initial and evolving areas.

Initial question areas	Successful and unsuccessful rehabilitation case/process Referrals and the patient selection process Developing a new IPR programme Use of a language interpreter Successful or unsuccessful conditions
Emerging question areas	Importance of patients’ relatives Professionals’ strategies for handling patients from other cultures Patients’ expectations and goals Coordinated care and cooperation with stakeholders Important factors for success
Examples of follow-up questions	Can you tell me more about a specific situation? How did you handle this situation? What did you do? What feelings and thoughts emerged? Can you give a more concrete example of a situation with a language interpreter?

Table 2. Example of a category with sub-categories and their properties.

Category	Sub-category	Property	Verbatim
Frustration	Benefits of IPRI programme	Doubts about the programme	It wasn’t really quite working
		Other alternatives	They need to activate themselves, they need to address their isolation
		Different results compared with the usual results	They can learn how to travel by bus on their own
		Significance of results	They might have felt seen and heard for the first time
	Coordinated care	Significant needs	There can be psychosocial, psychiatric problems, oh, there are a lot of interlinked health problems
		Not enough support	After we “let go", nothing happens
	Cultural dissonance	Living conditions	Is this more about ….. what the relatives want
		Meeting each other	You don’t understand my way of thinking at all
		Speaking Swedish	Some patients have an interpreter even though they don’t need one, while others don’t want an interpreter even though they do need one

Table 3. Background data for the informants, n = 12.

Characteristic	N
Gender
Female	10
Male	2
Profession
Occupational therapist	2
Physician	2
Physiotherapist	3
Psychologist	3
Social worker	2
	Mean (min–max)
Age, years	47 (34–66)
Years working in the profession	19 (5–39)
Years working with IPRI	1.8 (>1–3)

IPRI: Interprofessional Pain Rehabilitation with Interpreter.

Table 4. Categories and sub-categories included in the main category: Demanding and Meaningful Work.

Category	Sub-category
Frustration	Benefits of the IPRI programme
	Coordinated care
	Cultural dissonance
Challenges	Collecting information
	Cooperation with the patients
	Interpreted mediated communication and interpreters
Solutions	Handling interpreted mediated communication
	Developing the rehabilitation programme
	Supporting the patient in a change process
	Developing the own approach

Figure 1. The Demanding and Meaningful Work model.

Two arrows with overlapping heads illustrate opposing forces. The wider, downward arrow includes on one side the informants’ frustration and on the other side their challenges, which illustrate the continuous interaction between the two parts. The thinner, upward arrow includes the informants’ solutions.