Healthcare providers' use and acceptance of translation technologies in multilingual healthcare settings: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND

Language barriers remain a major challenge to equitable healthcare delivery. While qualified interpreters are considered the preferred standard, their availability is often limited. Translation technologies are therefore increasingly used in practice. However, quantitative evidence on how healthcare providers use these tools, how they evaluate them, and which factors are associated with their acceptance remains limited.

METHODS

A cross-sectional online survey was conducted among healthcare and psychosocial service providers across a range of clinical settings. Inferential analyses were restricted to the German sample (n = 258), with Romanian data (n = 185) used for exploratory descriptive comparison. The survey assessed experiences with language barriers, communication strategies, and acceptance of translation technologies based on the Technology Acceptance Model. Descriptive analyses characterised use patterns, and multivariable ordinary least squares regression with HC3-robust inference examined factors associated with behavioural intention to use translation technologies.

RESULTS

A total of 443 healthcare providers were included. Translation technologies were used by 65.0% of providers in the previous three months, often in the absence of formal organisational support, training, or guidelines. Use varied descriptively across country samples and professional groups, with higher use observed in the German sample and among medical-technical and nursing staff. Acceptance was moderately positive, with perceived usefulness showing the strongest controlled association with behavioural intention to use translation technologies (β = 0.44, p < 0.001). Organisational factors and contextual concerns were not independently associated with behavioural intention. Providers reported concerns regarding accuracy and data privacy, and more cautious use in contexts requiring nuanced, relational communication.

CONCLUSIONS

Translation technologies appear to function as pragmatic, ad hoc solutions to communication challenges in multilingual healthcare. While these tools may facilitate basic communication, their limitations in complex interactions and the absence of governance frameworks raise important considerations for their safe and equitable implementation. Rather than replacing professional interpreting services, translation technologies may be best understood as complementary resources within a broader communication strategy. Their contribution to equitable care will depend on how they are implemented to support meaningful communication and address the needs of service users facing language barriers.