Analysis of Indicators for Measuring Cultural Competence in Healthcare

This report delves into the crucial topic of measuring cultural competence within healthcare settings. It highlights the significance of cultural competence in patient-centered care and emphasizes the need for standardized measurement approaches. The report examines various indicators, including policy and structure indicators, used to assess cultural competence. Policy indicators, such as those aimed at reducing the use of family members as interpreters, are discussed in terms of their role in guiding organizational assessments and promoting compassionate care. Structure indicators, encompassing resources and materials essential for patient-centered care, are also addressed. The report underscores the importance of outcome indicators, like patient experience reports, to gauge the degree of cultural competence effectively. The report stresses that the use of percentages and proportions is crucial for effective assessment and emphasizes the overall importance of cultural competence in the provision of quality patient care, while acknowledging the ongoing need for standardized measurement tools.

Running head: MEASURING CULTURAL COMPETENCE 1
Measuring Cultural Competence
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation

Measuring Cultural Competence 2
Measuring Cultural Competence
Even though there exist plenty of measures of cultural competence in the form of
checklist and surveys, there lack standardized measures for assessing cultural competence. Use
of indicators in assessing cultural competence is fundamental in hospital settings to ensure that
patients receive services that comply with their healthcare needs. This paper is set to discuss
various indicators used in measuring cultural competence in patient-centered care.
Cultural competence in patient-centered care can be measured using policy indicators
which play a fundamental role in guiding the assessment of the organization or guiding changes
in the structure of healthcare (Alizadeh, & Chavan, 2016). Policy indicators are classified as
process indicators whose fundamental role is to either provide an accommodating and supportive
environment or promote compassionate and respective care. A typical example of policy
indicators is the policy that reduces the utilization of family members as interpreters. The
indicators can be presented in proportions or percentage form in order to effectively guide the
assessment process. For instance, if a policy is set to minimize the use of family members as
interpreters, it is vital to attach measurability that will assess the extent to which the policy is
effective. Also, cultural competence can be measured by anticipating the percentage of
vulnerable women, immigrants, indigenous Australians receiving healthcare in a culturally
appropriate manner.
Structure indicators also play a fundamental in guiding the assessment process. In this
care, structure indicators refer to materials and resources which are significant in the provision of
patient-centered care. Domains like the use of survey data sources like CCATH, support of
diverse workforce, access to interpretation services inform the need in the development of

Measuring Cultural Competence 3
structure indicators (Ahmed et al. 2018). However, it important to develop outcome indicators
like patient experience reports as measurability of the degree of cultural competence in patient-
centered care.
In conclusion, cultural competence is significant in the provision of patient-centered care.
However, measurability is not yet standardized. Thus, it is significant to utilize structural and
process indicators while incorporating percentages and proportions to promote effective
assessment.

Measuring Cultural Competence 4
References
Ahmed, S., Siad, F. M., Manalili, K., Lorenzetti, D. L., Barbosa, T., Lantion, V., ... & Santana,
M. J. (2018). How to measure cultural competence when evaluating patient-centred care:
a scoping review. BMJ Open, 8(7), e021525.
Alizadeh, S., & Chavan, M. (2016). Cultural competence dimensions and outcomes: a systematic
review of the literature. Health & social care in the community, 24(6), e117-e130.