The effectiveness of cultural competence programs in ethnic minority patient- centered health care—a systematic review of the literature A. M. N. RENZAHO1,2, P. ROMIOS3, C. CROCK4 AND A. L. SØNDERLUND5

1International Public Health Unit, Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Level 3, Burnet Building, 89 Commercial Rd, Melbourne, 3800 Victoria, Australia, 2Centre for Internal Health, Burnet Institute, Melbourne, 3004 Victoria, Australia, 3Health Issues Centre, Melbourne, 3086 Victoria, Australia, 4Australia Institute for Patient and Family-Centred Care, Melbourne, Victoria, USA, and 5Department of Psychology, University of Exeter, EX4 4QJ Devon, UK

Address reprint requests to: Andre M. N. Renzaho, International Public Health Unit, Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Level 3, Burnet Building, 89 Commercial Rd, Melbourne, 3800 Victoria, Australia. Tel: +61-3-92-51-77-72; Fax: +61-3-92-44-66-24; E-mail: andre.renzaho@monash.edu

Accepted for publication 2 December 2012

Abstract

Purpose. To examine the effectiveness of patient-centered care (PCC) models, which incorporate a cultural competence (CC) perspective, in improving health outcomes among culturally and linguistically diverse patients.

Data sources. The search included seven EBSCO-host databases: Academic Search Complete, Academic Search Premier, CINAHL with Full Text, Global Health, MEDLINE with Full Text, PsycINFO PsycARTICLES, PsycEXTRA, Psychology and Behavioural Sciences Collection and Pubmed, Web of Knowledge and Google Scholar.

Study selection. The review was undertaken following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and the critical appraisals skill program guidelines, covering the period from January 2000 to July 2011.

Data extraction. Data were extracted from the studies using a piloted form, including fields for study research design, popu- lation under study, setting, sample size, study results and limitations.

Results of data synthesis. The initial search identified 1450 potentially relevant studies. Only 13 met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 11 were quantitative studies and 2 were qualitative. The conclusions drawn from the retained studies indicated that CC PCC programs increased practitioners’ knowledge, awareness and cultural sensitivity. No significant findings were identified in terms of improved patient health outcomes.

Conclusion. PCC models that incorporate a CC component are increased practitioners’ knowledge about and awareness of dealing with culturally diverse patients. However, there is a considerable lack of research looking into whether this increase in practitioner knowledge translates into better practice, and in turn improved patient-related outcomes. More research examining this specific relationship is, thus, needed.

Keywords: patient-centered care, cultural competence, intercultural health care, health-care interventions

Introduction

Worldwide immigration has increased throughout the past century and considerably so in the past decade from 150 million migrants in 2000 to 214 million in 2010 [1]. Such change is reflected in various developed countries and specif- ically in public sectors such as health care, where the work- force and client base are becoming increasingly multifarious in terms of ethnicity and culture [2]. This demographic

transformation is not without its problems, however, as massive disparities in the health status of the population are evident, negatively affecting primarily ethnic and cultural mi- nority groups [3–6]. The successful delivery of health care in a multicultural

setting is often hampered by a host of factors, including chiefly language and non-verbal communication barriers between carer and patient [7, 8], lack of respect and/or aware- ness of cultural traditions and beliefs in the practitioner–client

International Journal for Quality in Health Care vol. 25 no. 3 © The Author 2013. Published by Oxford University Press in association with the International Society for Quality in Health Care; all rights reserved 261

International Journal for Quality in Health Care 2013; Volume 25, Number 3: pp. 261–269 10.1093/intqhc/mzt006 Advance Access Publication: 22 January 2013

relationship [9–11] and interpersonal as well as institutional stereotyping and prejudice [12–14]. Accordingly, several health-care models have been proposed to shift from a some- what paternalistic health-care model to an approach that engages the patient in decision making and self-care. Such models include cultural competence (CC) and patient-centered care (PCC) models [15, 16]. CC has been conceptualized as a ‘a set of congruent beha-

viors, attitudes and policies that come together in a system, agency or among professionals and enable that system, agency or those professions to work effectively in cross-cultural situa- tions’ [17–19]. It has been hypothesized that lack of awareness about cultural differences, together with culturally and linguis- tically diverse (CALD) patients’ lack of knowledge about the health system, can lead to two possible unwanted outcomes [16, 20]: (i) compromised patient–provider relationships, making it difficult for both providers and patients to achieve the most appropriate care and (ii) effects on patients’ health beliefs, practices and behaviors. As a result, the National Center for Cultural Competence in the USA has suggested a framework for CC [21] emphasizing the need of health-care systems to • have a defined set of values and principles, policies and structures that enable them to work effectively and cross-culturally;

• have the capacity to value diversity, conduct self- assessment, manage the difference and institutionaliza- tion of cultural knowledge and adapt to diversity and the cultural contexts of the communities they serve;

• incorporate the requirements above in all aspects of policy development, administration and practice/service delivery.

The health-care models

PCC relies on the recognition that each patient represents a distinctive case with unique requirements and treatment needs and, thus, focuses on holistic care provided through open carer–patient communication and collaboration [22]. Patient empowerment and support also feature prominently in this method. As such, PCC principally signifies a move away from a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach in health care to a more tailored treatment plan [22, 23]. Several studies attest the relevance of PCC in a range of

health-care settings and the association between the form of patient care and health outcomes. For example, Stewart et al. [24] found significant positive correlations between patient- centered communication and patient perception of finding common ground (P = 0.01) and in turn linked such positive perceptions with better recovery (P = 0.0001), less concern (P = 0.02), better emotional health (P= 0.05) and fewer diag- nostic checks and referrals (up to 2 months later). These results were supported by Wanzer et al. [25] who linked patient satisfaction with communication and physician and nurse practice of PCC (r = 0.73, P = 0.001; r = 0.61, P = 0.001, respectively). Patient satisfaction with care received was also correlated with perceived physician PCC practice (r = 0.67, P= 0.001) and perceived nurse PCC practice (r = 0.68, P= 0.001) [25].

Similar findings highlight the value of PCC in other set- tings, including general preventive health care [26], diabetes management [27], cancer management [28–30], post-cancer follow-up treatment [31, 32], palliative care [33, 34], mental health [35] and HIV management and treatment [36]. Thus, there is considerable research providing relatively clear support for beneficial relationships between the practice of PCC and patient health, treatment and satisfaction.

PCC and CC

As PCC is designed to take into account the specific circum- stances relevant to each patient—including ethnic and cul- tural variables. The successful delivery of this type of collaborative care relies on the ‘CC’ of the health-care pro- vider. That is, for effective PCC, the practitioner must be able to communicate effectively verbally and non-verbally and respect the traditional practices and beliefs of the patient [37]. The significance of CC in health care is exemplified in several studies on issues such as physician language ability, cultural knowledge and patient satisfaction. Fernandez et al. [38], for example, found significant positive associations between physician self-rated language ability and successful elicitation of and responsiveness to patient concerns and pro- blems (OR 4.3; 95% CI, 1.75–10.56). Physician self-rated understanding of patients’ health-related cultural beliefs was also significantly linked with patient clarity (OR 3.98; 95% CI, 1.43–11.45), responsiveness (OR 4.56; 95% CI, 1.67– 12.46) and understanding of prognosis and condition (OR 4.5; 95% CI, 1.73–11.79). Similarly, Mazor et al. [8] found that a 10-week medical Spanish course for pediatric emer- gency department physicians was significantly associated with decreased use of interpreter services in patient care post- intervention (OR 0.34; 95% CI, 0.16–0.71) and increased patient satisfaction in terms of perceived physician concern (OR 2.1; 95% CI, 1.0–4.2), respectfulness (OR 3.0; 95%CI, 1.4–6.5) and listening/communication (OR 2.9; 95% CI, 1.4–5.9). In other examples, the CC of practitioners was positively correlated with minority patient satisfaction with received medical care (r2 = 0.193, P < 0.05) [39] (r = 0.32, P< 0.001) [40] and decreased blood pressure among hyper- tensive patients (r = –0.18; P < 0.05) [40]. These findings are further backed up in other research and appear to be rele- vant in a broad range of health-care settings [41–44]. As such, CC in health care can best be defined as practi-

tioner flexibility and adaptability in terms of working effective- ly within a variety of cultural and ethnic contexts. This includes linguistic abilities, as well as cultural knowledge, awareness, sensitivity and respect [32]. Considering the in- creasing ethnic and cultural diversity in health-care clientele, CC is, thus, an integral aspect of PCC.

The current review

PCC and CC have been found to be complementary in terms of improving health-care quality and outcomes [15]. Whereas patient-centeredness aims to improve health-care quality by

Renzaho et al.

262

emphasizing the inclusion of the patient’s perspective general- ly in caregiving, CC centers on circumventing cultural barriers between the health-care provider and client [45]. As such, both concepts focus on improved health care with an em- phasis on patient-centeredness that in turn begs for acknowl- edgement of patient diversity. On this backdrop, PCC and CC approaches aim for the development of effective communica- tion and clinical capabilities in health practitioners. For this reason, PCC and CC have been used interchangeably in the literature [45]. Nonetheless, there are relatively few PCC models that specifically incorporate a CC component and fewer still that have a cultural focus and have been empirically developed and evaluated [12, 46]. Thus, the aim of the follow- ing systematic review is to examine the effectiveness of PCC models that incorporate a CC perspective, in improving health outcomes among CALD patients.

Method

Protocol

This review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines that can be accessed at www.prisma-guidelines.org (Fig. 1).

Information sources

A search of the following databases was conducted during August 2011: Academic Search Complete, Academic Search Premier, CINAHL with Full Text, Global Health, MEDLINE with Full Text, PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, PsycEXTRA, Psychology and Behavioural Sciences Collection, Pubmed, Web of Knowledge and Google Scholar.

Search strategy and study selection process

The search terms used were based on MeSH keywords for ‘PCC’ and ‘cultural competency’. Searches were conducted on the following terms simultaneously: (i) Cultural competency terms (MeSH terms):

Competency, Cultural; Cultural Competencies; Cultural Competence; Competence, Cultural.

(ii) PCC terms (MeSH terms): Care, Patient-Centered; Patient-Centered Care; Nursing, Patient-Centered; Nursing, Patient Centered; Patient-Centered Nursing; Patient-Centered Nursing; Patient-Focused Care; Care, Patient-Focused; Patient-Focused Care; Medical Home; Home, Medical; Homes, Medical; Medical Homes;

(iii) Other terms (text word): Prejudice, Health care; Racism, Health care; Attitude, Health care.

Reference lists for relevant papers were also manually searched for additional citations. Studies were included in the review based on the following criteria: (i) The study was published in a peer-reviewed scientific

journal. (ii) The full text was available in English. (iii) The population under study comprised health-care

professionals and/or students and/or ethnic minorities.

(iv) The study centered on the development and effective- ness of patient-centered health-care models with a CC focus.

(v) The date of the publication was no earlier than 1 January 2000.

Validity assessment

Search results were assessed in three rounds. First, articles were filtered based on their title. Second, articles were retained or excluded after reviewing their abstracts. Third, the full-text versions of the remaining articles were obtained and reviewed. The empirical quality of the studies was assessed according to critical appraisal skill program guidelines (see Table 1).

Data extraction process

Data were extracted from the studies using a piloted form, including fields for study research design, population under study, setting, sample size, study results and limitations.

Figure 1 Flow chart of study selection.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Table 1 Data extraction strategy

Inclusion criteria Yes No

Is the paper peer reviewed and is the full text available?

Proceed ↓

Exclude ↓

Does the study focus health-care delivery to ethnic minorities?

Proceed ↓

Exclude ↓

Does the study involve the development and assessment of (an) intercultural PCC model(s)?

Proceed ↓

Exclude ↓

Final decision Include Exclude

Cultural competence and patient-centered health care • Equity

263

Results

Study selection

A total of 1450 papers were identified in the initial search. The majority of these were rejected based on one or more of the following factors: the paper focused on general health- care delivery models without a CC component; the paper described culture-related training programs that were not part of PCC programs; the paper described CC health-care models, but with no empirical evaluation or evidence base; the paper was about work culture rather than ethnic culture; the paper did not cite empirical research (commentaries, book reviews, etc.); or a combination of the above. Overall, 13 studies met the inclusion criteria (see Table 1).

Study characteristics and samples

Seven of the studies reviewed were from the USA, four from Canada and two from the UK (See Table 1). The majority of the research was conducted in a professional (clinical/hos- pital) setting (n = 9) [47–55], but student settings were also used (n= 5) [49, 56–59]. All participants were adults over 18 years of age. The studies predominantly (n= 11) relied on quantitative research designs, including randomized control trials (RCT), longitudinal design, cross-sectional design and descriptive correlational design (see Table 1). Qualitative re- search designs were employed in the remaining studies (n= 2). Outcome measures comprised patient satisfaction with care, health outcome or practitioner behavior in four of the studies [50–52, 54], whereas the remaining nine studies gen- erally used practitioner knowledge and/or awareness of PCC and CC issues as evaluation measures [47–49, 53, 55–59] (Table 2).

Summary of findings

Two studies examined patient health outcomes as an evalu- ation measure. Majumdar et al. [51] investigated the effects of a CC course on 114 nurses and homecare workers. Effects of the program were also observed for 133 patients. Health-care workers who received the training demonstrated significantly higher understanding of multiculturalism than a control group (P< 0.0001). Similar findings were evident for cultural awareness (P= 0.0001), understanding of cultural dif- ferences (P = 0.001), cultural beliefs (P = 0.004), adopting health-care literature (P = 0.001), considering patient social circumstances (P = 0.011) and regarding culture as important in successful health-care treatment (P = 0.001). These results persisted over time. There were no significant findings in terms of patient health outcomes—however, this was pos- sibly due to attrition in the patient participant group [51]. Thom et al. [54] assessed the effectiveness of a CC training

curriculum administered to 53 physicians. The training program comprised cultural knowledge, intercultural commu- nication and cultural brokering (engaging the patient in the de- velopment of a treatment plan in a culturally sensitive fashion). The impact of the intervention was measured in

terms of the CC of the physician as rated by the patient. Secondary measures included patient satisfaction with received health care and outcomes. The study yielded no sig- nificant effects across all evaluation variables. Limitations were noted, however, and related to the brevity of the training cur- riculum (3–5 h), insufficient follow-up assessments and the fact that over 70% of participating physicians were of another ethnicity than Caucasian and, therefore, possibly already cul- turally capable [54]. The remaining eight studies relying on quantitative research

designs examined practitioner training and education pro- grams, with the exception of a single study that looked into African-American patient satisfaction and perception of phys- ician CC [52]. Here, the effectiveness of the ‘Ask Me 3’ inter- vention was evaluated. The program focused on increasing the quality of PCC and CC, by encouraging African-American patient involvement in the clinical process [52]. Results indi- cated no improvements in physician CC as rated by the patient. Significant progress was evident, however, in satisfac- tion for patients who saw their regular physician (P = 0.014). Thus, an interaction effect of physician familiarity and the intervention appeared to increase patient satisfaction with care received. Limitations mainly related to a small sample size (n = 64) [52]. Brathwaite and Majumdar [47, 48] assessed the effects of

a PCC educational program offered to 76 nurses at a Canadian hospital. The evaluation centered on pre- and post- intervention scores on the Cultural Knowledge Scale. Significant increases in CC over time were evident (P< 0.02) —specifically in relation to cultural knowledge, awareness, confidence and use of lessons learned [47, 48]. A study in the USA assessed the Cultural Competence

and Mutual Respect program that was delivered over 3 years to 1974 health-care students [57]. Evaluation was based on pre- to post-scores of the Inventory for Assessing the Process of Cultural Competence-Revised scale (ranging from 25 to 100 points), and significant improvements in student CC were evident with males increasing by 4.1 points (P < 0.001) and females by 3.8 points (P< 0.001) [57]. Comparable findings were established in four other studies.

[49, 53, 56, 59] One study [58] assessing the impact of a CC PCC educational program on university students found no significant improvements in CC post-intervention. This was, however, probably due to limitations of the measurement scales used and the brevity of the intervention period [58]. Finally, two qualitative studies were included in the review.

Kirmayer et al. [50] evaluated a program implemented as a cul- tural consultation service for mental health practitioners and primary care clinicians. Assessment of the service occurred through practitioner observation, reason for consultation, examining cultural formulations and recommendations as well as consultation outcome in terms of clinician satisfaction [50]. Patients comprised immigrants, refugees and asylum seekers (n = 102). The most common reasons for consultation with the service were difficulties with diagnosis (58%) and treat- ment planning (45%) as well as requests for assistance with specific ethnic groups or clients (25%) [50]. It was further evident that the main themes in terms of practitioner cultural

Renzaho et al.

264

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Table 2 PCC models with a CC scope—from 2000 to present

Author (year) Location Experimental design

Sample (n) Integrated cultural care model

Outcome measures Results and limitations

Brathwaite[48] Canada Longitudinal pre- to post-intervention study

Registered nurses (76) Brief CC training course. Scores on the CKS. Results showed that the course was effective in increasing participants’ levels of CC (P< 0.000). Limitations relate to the small sample size and the lack of patient health outcome effects.

Brathwaite and Majumdar [47]

Canada Longitudinal pre- to post-intervention study

Registered nurses (76) Five-week CC training course.

Scores on the CKS. Nurses’ CKS scores increased significantly (Wilks’ Lambda P < 0.01). Limitations relate to small sample size, generalizability and lack of patient health outcome effects.

Crandall et al. [56] USA Longitudinal pre- to post-intervention study

Second-year medical students (12)

Adaptation and integration of cultural awareness, sensitivity and knowledge in medical practice.

Multi-national Assessment Questionnaire pre- to post-intervention scores.

A positive impact was apparent pre- to post-intervention. Further research to establish whether effect decays or persists. Lack of assessment of patient health outcome effects.

Ghallager-Thompson et al. [49]

USA Longitudinal pre- to post-intervention study

Health-care professionals and students (340)

The Alzheimer’s Hispanic Outreach, Resource and Access Project.

Participant knowledge of CC and related attitude and clinical behavior.

Significant improvements in the measured variables were evident post-intervention (P< 0.05–0.005).

Kirmayer et al. [50] Canada Qualitative study Minority mental health patients (100)

Cultural consultation service; integrating different perspectives of psychiatry and medicine.

Referring clinicians’ satisfaction with patient progress.

Clinicians reported increased insight into cases, improved treatment, therapeutic alliance, understanding and communication. Limitations relate to the small sample size.

Majumdar et al. [51] Canada RCT Health-care providers (114) and patients (133)

Cultural sensitivity training for health-care providers, cultural awareness, communication and understanding.

Health-care provider attitude and cultural competency and patient health outcomes.

The program improved knowledge and attitudes of health-care providers in the experimental group (P = 0.011–0.0001). There were significant improvement in patient health outcomes and satisfaction.

Michalopoulou et al. [52]

USA RCT African-American patients (64)

Culturally sensitive GP practice of Ask Me 3 intervention. Encouraging active patient articipation in clinical process. Communication and interaction.

Patient-Perceived Cultural Competency Measure score.

No significant differences were found between experimental and control groups. Individuals seeing their regular GP reported significantly higher levels of satisfaction with care, than patients seeing their regular GP. Limitations include small sample size and a single ethnicity under study.

(continued )

C ulturalcom

petence and

patient-centered health

care •

Equity

2 6 5

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Table 2 Continued

Author (year) Location Experimental design

Sample (n) Integrated cultural care model

Outcome measures Results and limitations

Musolino et al. [57] USA Longitudinal pre- to post-intervention study

IHSS, professionals in medicine [60], pharmacy, nursing and PT (1974)

Cultural Competency and Mutual Respect education program.

Pre- to post-intervention scores on Campinha-Bacote’s Inventory for Assessing the Process of Cultural Competence-Revised.

Overall progress toward CC was observed pre- to post-intervention (P< 0.001). Cultural proficiency was not attained in IHSS, however. Further research needs to look into how the program can be delivered more effectively and its specific effect on health outcomes.

Reicherter et al. [58] USA Case control study/ pre-, post-test.

PT students (26) CC educational program. Yang Social Interaction survey [46] scores and Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test scores pre- to post-intervention.

There were no overall improvements in student knowledge and attitudes pre- to post-interventions. Limitations relate to small sample size and lack of examination of patient health outcomes effects.

Smith [53] USA Two group longitudinal pre- to post-intervention study

Registered nurses (94) CC curriculum. CSES scores and knowledge base scores.

Scores on the CSES and knowledge base were significantly better for intervention group (P= 0.015). Limitations relate to the sample size and the lack of assessment of patient health outcome effects.

Tang et al. [59] USA Cross-sectional pre- to post-intervention study

Medical students (167) Socio-cultural Medicine Program

Student attitudes to socio-cultural medicine.

Significant improvements were noted post-intervention in terms of general attitude, understanding of cultural issues in health care, importance of culture in doctor–patient relationship and patient health behavior (P < 0.01–0.001).

Thom et al. [54] USA RCT Primary care physicians (53) and patients (429)

CC curriculum for resident and practicing physicians.

Patient-Reported Physician Cultural Competence score; secondary outcomes were changes in patient health status and satisfaction.

There was no discernable impact of the intervention on patient health and attitude. Limitations relate to the brevity of the intervention.

Webb and Sergison [55]

UK Qualitative study Health-care professionals and students, social services professional and education professionals (140)

CC and antiracism training.

Self-reported cultural and racism awareness, knowledge and changed behavior.

CC and antiracism training were well received by professionals. It was a positive experience for trainees and perceived to be relevant to their practice. Appropriate and non-threatening training in CC change attitudes, behaviors and practice, including promoting good practice in communication across linguistic and cultural differences. Limitations relate to lack of measurement of patient satisfaction and health outcomes.

CKS, Cultural Knowledge Scale; IHSS, interdisciplinary health science students; PT, physical therapy; CSES, Cultural Self-Efficacy Scale.

Renzaho etal.

2 6 6

formulation and awareness were largely related to communica- tion issues and ignorance of traditions, different family struc- tures, identity conceptions and religious issues. [50]. Clinicians indicated favorable reviews of the consultation

service and reported overall greater CC [50]. In a similar study, Webb and Sergison [55] examined the effectiveness of the CC PCC training course, Equal Rights Equal Access. Of the respondents, 75% (n = 36) believed that the course had been effective in teaching CC and in particular communication and use of interpreter services [55]. Other notable themes were related to increased self-reported clinician awareness of the specific needs of ethnic minorities, embracing diversity in their clientele and alertness to own stereotypical views and generalizations [55].

Discussion

This review examined the effectiveness of PCC models that incorporate a CC perspective, in improving health outcomes among CALD patients. There were 13 studies that met the inclusion criteria for this review. Overall, we found evidence supporting the effectiveness of CC PCC training in increas- ing knowledge levels, self-reported practice and patient satis- faction. However, whereas increases in cultural knowledge and awareness were evident, no studies reported any signifi- cant findings in terms of patient health outcomes. In fact, only two studies used this variable as an outcome measure [51, 54], and both of these studies were hampered by partici- pant attrition or small sample sizes and short intervention periods. Importantly, the fact that most of the research on CC PCC programs measured effectiveness in terms of practi- tioner knowledge and not patient health represents a major shortcoming to the current research on this topic, as patient health outcome is one of, if not the most important indicator of effectiveness of any care model. Thus, the current results in this regard are limited, and more research is required to properly assess the impact of the reviewed interventions on patient health.

Limitations

As mentioned above, a major limitation to the research reviewed pertains to the lack of patient health outcome mea- sures in the majority of studies. Only two studies included such an evaluation variable, and both generated non- significant impacts—most likely due to low participant numbers and participant attrition. Future research should include evaluation of the practical effects of CC in PCC pro- grams in terms of patient health outcomes. Another limitation comprises the fact that the review did not include studies pub- lished in languages other than English, thus limiting an inter- national viewpoint. The current review was unable to include non-English language studies due to lack of funds to meet costs related to translation services. Finally, the difference in research design across studies—and the consequent difficulty in synthesizing and comparing the results of the research— also represents an important limitation.

Conclusion

The objective of this systematic review centered on the effect- iveness of PCC models that incorporate a CC perspective, in improving health outcomes among CALD patients. Of the initial 1450 studies identified in the first search round, 13 met the final inclusion criteria and were included in the review. The majority of the research demonstrated effectiveness of PCC models in terms of clinician/practitioner cultural knowl- edge, awareness and sensitivity. Only two articles examined effects of the intervention programs on patient health out- comes, with both studies reporting non-significant results on these variables. As such, although the programs may increase practitioner knowledge and awareness, there is no evidence that this translates to improved patient health. More research is, thus, required to properly examine the impact, if any, of CC PCC models on health outcomes.

Funding

This study was funded by the Australian Commission of Safety and Quality in Health Care.

References

1. International organization for migration. Facts & Figures −Global Estimates and Trends. 2010. http://www.iom.int/ jahia/Jahia/about-migration/facts-and-figures/lang/en (25 August 2011, data last accessed).

2. Tate DM. Cultural awareness: bridging the gap between caregivers and Hispanic patients. J Contin Educ in Nurs 2003;34:213–7.

3. Krishnan JA, Diette GB, Skinner EA et al. Race and sex differ- ences in consistency of care with national asthma guidelines in managed care organizations. Arch Intern Med 2001;161:1660.

4. Schulman KA et al. The effect of race and sex on physicians’ recommendations for cardiac catheterization. New Eng J Med 1999;340:618–26.

5. Sheifer SE, Escarce JJ, Schulman KA. Race and sex differences in the management of coronary artery disease* 1. Am Heart J, 2000;139:848–57.

6. Brach C, Fraserirector I. Can cultural competency reduce racial and ethnic health disparities? A review and conceptual model. Med Care Res Rev 2000;57:181–217.

7. Markova T, Broome B. Effective communication and delivery of culturally competent health care. Urol Nurs 2007;27:239–42.

8. Mazor SS, Hampers LC, Chande VT et al. Teaching Spanish to pediatric emergency physicians: effects on patient satisfaction. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2002;156:693–5.

9. Jæger K, Jensen AA. Troubling diversity? Exploring nurses’ discur- sive construction of intercultural encounters in healthcare settings. Int J Divers Organ Communities and Nations 2009;9:99–108.

10. Eggenberger SK, Grassley J, Restrepo E. Culturally competent nursing care for families: listening to the voices of Mexican-American women. Online J Issues Nurs 2006;11:1.

Cultural competence and patient-centered health care • Equity

267

11. Hasnain M, Connell KJ, Menon U et al. Patient-centered care for muslim women: provider and patient perspectives. J Women’s Health (Larchmt) 2011;20:73–83.

12. Anderson LM, Scrimshaw SC, Fullilove MT et al. Culturally competent healthcare systems 1: A systematic review. Am J Prev Med 2003;24:68–79.

13. Johnstone MJ, Kanitsaki O. Cultural racism, language prejudice and discrimination in hospital contexts: an Australian study. Divers Health Soc Care 2008;5:19–30.

14. Weinick RM, Zuvekas SH, Cohen JW. Racial and ethnic differ- ences in access to and use of health care services, 1977 to 1996. Med Care Res Rev 2000;57:36.

15. Hasnain-Wynia R. Is evidence-based medicine patient-centered and is patient-centered care evidence-based? Health Services Research 2006;41:1–8.

16. Renzaho A. Re-visioning cultural competence in community health services in Victoria. Aust Health Rev 2008;32:223–35.

17. Eisenbruch M. The lens of culture, the lens of health: toward a framework and toolkit for cultural competence. In: UNESCO Asia-Pacific Regional Training Workshop, Bangkok, 2004.

18. Isaacs MR, Benjamin MP. Towards a Culturally Competent System of Care, Volume II, Programs which Utilize Culturally Competent Principles. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Child Development Center, CASSP Technical Assistance Center, 1991.

19. Cross T, Bazron B, Dennis K et al. Towards a Culturally Competent System of Care, Vol. 1. Georgetown University. Washington, DC: Center for Child and Human Development, CASSP Technical Assistance Center, 1989.

20. Fortier JP. Cultural Competence Practice and Training: Overview. Diversity Rx. Massachussetts, USA: Resources for Cross Cultural Health Care and Drexel University School of Public Health Center for Health, 2003.

21. National Center for Cultural Competence. Bridging the Cultural Divide in Health Care Settings: The Essential Role of Cultural Broker Programs. Georgetown, USA: Georgetown University Center for Child and Human Development, Georgetown University Medical Center, 2004.

22. Bechtel C, Ness DL. If you build it, will they come? Designing truly patient-centered health care. Health Aff (Millwood) 2010;29:914.

23. Frampton SB, Charmel PA. Putting Patients First: Best Practices in Patient-Centered Care. Vol. 38. San Francisco, USA: Jossey-Bass 2009.

24. Stewart M, Brown JB, Donner A et al. The impact of patient- centered care on outcomes. J Fam Pract 2000;49:796–804.

25. Wanzer MB, Booth-Butterfield M, Gruber K. Perceptions of health care providers’ communication: relationships between patient-centered communication and satisfaction. Health Commun 2004;16:363–84.

26. Flach SD, McCoy KD, Vaughn TE et al. Does patient-centered care improve provision of preventive services? J Gen Intern Med 2004;19:1019–26.

27. Williams G, Lynch M, Glasgow RE. Computer-assisted inter- vention improves patient-centered diabetes care by increasing autonomy support. Health Psychol 2007;26:728–34.

28. Mallinger JB, Griggs JJ, Shields CG. Patient-centered care and breast cancer survivors’ satisfaction with information. Patient Educ Couns 2005;57:342–9.

29. Epstein R, Street R, Jr. Patient-Centered Communication in Cancer Care: Promoting Healing and Reducing Suffering. Maryland, USA: National Cancer Institute, NIH Publication, 2007, 07–6225.

30. Arora NK. Importance of patient-centered care in enhancing patient well-being: a cancer survivor’s perspective. Qual Life Res 2009;18:1–4.

31. Kahn KL, Schneider EC, Malin JL et al. Patient centered experi- ences in breast cancer: predicting long-term adherence to tam- oxifen use. Med Care 2007;45:431.

32. Zolnierek KBH, DiMatteo MR. Physician communication and patient adherence to treatment: a meta-analysis. Med Care 2009;47:826.

33. Goodlin SJ, Hauptman PJ, Arnold R et al. Consensus statement: palliative and supportive care in advanced heart failure* 1. J Card Fail 2004;10:200–9.

34. Yedidia MJ. Transforming doctor-patient relationships to promote patient-centered care: lessons from palliative care. J Pain Symptom Manage 2007;33:40–57.

35. Calveley J, Verhoeven A, Hopcroft D. A patient-centred referral pathway for mild to moderate lifestyle and mental health pro- blems: does this model work in practice. J Prim Health Care 2009;1:50–6.

36. Roberts KJ. Physician-patient relationships, patient satisfaction, and antiretroviral medication adherence among HIV-infected adults attending a public health clinic. AIDS Patient Care STDs, 2002;16:43–50.

37. Campinha-Bacote J. The process of cultural competence in the delivery of healthcare services: a model of care. J Transcult Nurs 2002;13:181.

38. Fernandez A, Schillinger D, Grumbach K et al. Physician lan- guage ability and cultural competence: an exploratory study of communication with Spanish-speaking patients. J Gen Intern Med 2004;19:167–74.

39. Castro A, Ruiz E. The effects of nurse practitioner cultural competence on Latina patient satisfaction. J Am Acad Nurs Pract 2009;21:278–86.

40. Thom DH, Tirado MD. Development and validation of a patient-reported measure of physician cultural competency. Med Care Res Rev, 2006;63:636.

41. Beach MC, Price EG, Gary TL et al. Cultural competence: a systematic review of health care provider educational interven- tions. Med Care 2005;43:356–73.

42. Tucker CM, Marsiske M, Rice KG et al. Patient-centered cultur- ally sensitive health care: model testing and refinement. Health Psychol, 2011;30:342–50.

43. Thomas VJ, Cohn T. Communication skills and cultural awareness courses for healthcare professionals who care for patients with sickle cell disease. J Adv Nurs 2006;53: 480–8.

44. Johnstone MJ, Kanitsaki O. Culture, language, and patient safety: making the link. Int J Qual Health Care 2006;18:383.

Renzaho et al.

268

45. Saha S, Beach MC, Cooper LA. Patient centeredness, cultural com- petence and healthcare quality. J Natl Med Assoc 2008;100:1275–85.

46. Chipps JA, Simpson B, Brysiewicz P. The effectiveness of cultural-competence training for health professionals in community-based rehabilitation: a systematic review of litera- ture. Worldviews Evid Based Nurs 2008;5:85–94.

47. Brathwaite AC, Majumdar B. Evaluation of a cultural compe- tence educational programme. J Adv Nurs 2006;53:470–9.

48. Brathwaite AE. Evaluation of a cultural competence course. J Transcult Nurs 2005;16:361–9.

49. Gallagher-Thompson D, Haynie D, Takagi KA et al. Impact of an Alzheimer’s disease education program: focus on Hispanic families. Gerontol Geriatr Educ 2000;20:25–40.

50. Kirmayer LJ, Groleau D, Guzder J et al. Cultural consultation: a model of mental health service for multicultural societies. Can J Psychiatry 2003;48:145.

51. Majumdar B, Browne G, Roberts J et al. Effects of cultural sen- sitivity training on health care provider attitudes and patient outcomes. J Nurs Scholarsh 2004;36:6.

52. Michalopoulou G, Falzarano P, Arfken C et al. Implementing ask me 3 to improve African-American patient satisfaction and perceptions of physician cultural competency. J Cult Divers 2010;17:62–7.

53. Smith LS. Evaluation of an educational intervention to increase cultural competence among registered nurses. J Cult Divers 2001;8:50–63.

54. Thom DH, Tirado MD, Woon TL et al. Development and evaluation of a cultural competency training curriculum. BMC Med Educ 2006;6:8–38.

55. Webb E, Sergison M. Evaluation of cultural competence and antiracism training in child health services. Arch Dis Child 2002;88:291–4.

56. Crandall SJ, George G, Marion GS et al. Applying theory to the design of cultural competency training for medical students: a case study. Acad Med 2003;78:588.

57. Musolino GM, Burkhalter ST, Crookston B et al. Understanding and eliminating disparities in health care: devel- opment and assessment of cultural competence for interdiscip- linary health professionals at The University of Utah – a 3-year investigation. J Phys Ther Educ 2010;24:25–36.

58. Reichherter EA, William B, Boissonnault W et al. Enhancing cultural competence of physical therapy students: a shared di- versity project between Howard University and the University of Wisconsin-Madison. J Best Pract Health Prof Divers Educ Res Policy 2007;1:25–39.

59. Tang TS, Fantone JC, Bozynski MEA et al. Implementation and evaluation of an undergraduate sociocultural medicine program. Academic Medicine 2002;77:578–85.

60. Smedley BD, Stith AY, Nelson AR. Unequal treatment: con- fronting racial and ethnic disparities in health care. Committee on Understanding and Eliminating Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Health Care. Washington, DC: National Academy (of Sciences) Press.

Cultural competence and patient-centered health care • Equity

269