Suchergebnisse

This article presents provider experiences with the Cultural Formulation Interview (CFI) in Danish mental healthcare for migrant patients. Semi-structured interviews with 17 providers and 20 recorded CFI sessions were analyzed with a constructivist grounded theory approach. Based on our empirical material, we endorse the CFI's ability to facilitate working alliance and a profound and contextually situated understanding of the patient. Further, the CFI supported less-experienced providers in investigating cultural issues. Conversely, we found that CFI questions about cultural identity and background evoked notions of distance and 'othering' in the encounter. Nine providers had felt discomfort and professional insecurity when the CFI compelled them to introduce explanatory frameworks of culture in the mental health assessment. Eleven providers had experienced that the abstract nature of the questions inhibited patient responses or led to short and stereotypical descriptions, which had limited analytical value. We describe the contradictory CFI experiences of alliance versus distance at three levels: 1) at the CFI instrument level; 2) at the organizational level; and 3) at the contextual and structural level. We demonstrate benefits and pitfalls of using the CFI with migrants in Denmark, which is an example of a European healthcare context where cultural consultation is not an integrated concept in health education programs and where the notion of culture is contentious due to negative political rhetoric on multiculturalism. We suggest that the CFI should be introduced with thorough training; focus on fidelity; and supervision in the clinical application and understanding of the concept of culture.

Previous studies have shown the importance of focusing on the cultural background of migrant patients in the psychiatric assessment. The Cultural Formulation Interview (CFI) offers a patient-focused approach to foreground the cultural context of the patient in the clinical encounter. Our objective was to explore the acceptability and clinical utility of the CFI for physicians and its acceptability for migrant patients seen at a transcultural mental health clinic in Denmark. In this study, the CFI was used in a second session following the standard clinical assessment to explore what additional information was gained from the CFI. Data on the use of the CFI data were collected immediately after the interview with questionnaires for medical doctors (MDs) ( N = 12) and patients ( N = 71). The findings showed that the CFI, in addition to standard assessment, was useful to the MDs for planning the treatment (60.0%) and for exploring the patients' view on their cultural and social context (74.7%), but less so for the diagnostic process (9.9%). Patients reported high overall satisfaction with the CFI (93.0%) and viewed it as a welcome opportunity to tell their story. The findings add to existing knowledge on the CFI in terms of acceptability for patients of a primarily Middle Eastern origin and patients using an interpreter during the CFI session. Based on the findings of this study, the CFI is recommended to clinicians for treatment planning purposes and for exploring the cultural and social context of the patient.