...
| Country | Date | Response |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 30 April | In Dutch, we would usually put the approach in front of the procedure. E.g. 'abdominal repair of diaphragmatic hernia'; 'subclavian decompression of nerve'; 'laparoscopic abdominal hysterectomy'; etc. However, using a signal word is probably clearer. We think 'using' and 'by' would probably both be suitable, and 'by' would cause less confusion because you could then reserve 'using' for devices. |
| Denmark | 2020-05-05 | I can see that in our translation, we have used the same wording for all three examples - probably what is closest to 'by ... approach'. In our ICD translation however, we have used 'via.... approach'. I think that both ‘by’ and ‘via’ describes the route (latin: road) while 'using' is in connection with some device or method. |
| Australia | 2020-05-08 | I agree with the above, "using" is more applicable to something physical (a device). "via" or "by" work - note this definition of "via" has "by way of". I'd probably preference "via" for approach, less word. "by" could be reserved for "techniques"? Also, this is probably just for FSN and Core PTs. As we'd probably also do something similar to Netherlands and reorder/drop words etc. Possibly best to be guided by the members doing translations. |
| Belgium | 2020-05-12 | For these procedures, it seems we translate the FSN quitte literally with keeping the 'approach' at the end of the translated term; The translation and use of 'by', 'using', or 'via' depends on the context as we do not translate 'approach' for each concept in the same way... But at this moment I do not recognise any logical translation pattern. |
| Member countries without a CMAG rep |
...