Introduction Effective communication between general practitioners (GPs) and patients is essential for high-quality healthcare, improved patient outcomes and physician satisfaction. However communication barriers related to cultural differences and low socio-economic status (SES) can negatively impact patient care. This study explores the experiences of GPs in navigating communication challenges with patients from diverse cultural and socio-economic backgrounds, aiming to identify strategies to improve these interactions.

Methods This study used a qualitative phenomenological approach to explore GPs’ experiences with communication challenges with patients from diverse cultural backgrounds and/or low socioeconomic status. Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with GPs from Jans Huisartsen, a general practice in Rotterdam. Data were analyzed with thematic analysis.

Results A total of 13 GPs from Jans Huisartsen were interviewed. Key challenges included language barriers, different expectations, and different cultural norms. Consequences of communication challenges included misunderstanding, lower medication adherence, less shared decision-making, and decreased patient satisfaction. To improve communication, GPs employed strategies such as simplifying language, using translators, and personalizing consultations.

Conclusion This study highlights the experiences of GPs regarding how cultural diversity and SES affect effective communication. The results underline the importance of addressing specific challenges faced by these patients, particularly by fostering shared decision making and re-evaluating the role of family translators. Enhancing GP training on communication with culturally diverse patients or patients with low SES and promoting the use of professional translators could improve patient understanding, adherence and satisfaction, ultimately contributing to more equitable and effective healthcare for these vulnerable populations.

DZ worked as a practice assistant for Jans Huisartsen before commencement of the study.

This study did not receive any funding

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

The non-WMO review committee of the Erasmus MC waived ethical approval for this work.

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Yes

All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors through DataverseNL.

https://doi.org/10.34894/CZKSKW