Dataset Information

Do professional interpreters improve clinical care for patients with limited English proficiency? A systematic review of the literature.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To determine if professional medical interpreters have a positive impact on clinical care for limited English proficiency (LEP) patients.

Data sources

A systematic literature search, limited to the English language, in PubMed and PsycINFO for publications between 1966 and September 2005, and a search of the Cochrane Library.

Study design

Any peer-reviewed article which compared at least two language groups, and contained data about professional medical interpreters and addressed communication (errors and comprehension), utilization, clinical outcomes, or satisfaction were included. Of 3,698 references, 28 were found by multiple reviewers to meet inclusion criteria and, of these, 21 assessed professional interpreters separately from ad hoc interpreters. Data were abstracted from each article by two reviewers. Data were collected on the study design, size, comparison groups, analytic technique, interpreter training, and method of determining the participants' need for an interpreter. Each study was evaluated for the effect of interpreter use on four clinical topics that were most likely to either impact or reflect disparities in health and health care.

Principal findings

In all four areas examined, use of professional interpreters is associated with improved clinical care more than is use of ad hoc interpreters, and professional interpreters appear to raise the quality of clinical care for LEP patients to approach or equal that for patients without language barriers.

Conclusions

Published studies report positive benefits of professional interpreters on communication (errors and comprehension), utilization, clinical outcomes and satisfaction with care.

SUBMITTER: Karliner LS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC1955368 | biostudies-literature | 2007 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Do professional interpreters improve clinical care for patients with limited English proficiency? A systematic review of the literature.

Karliner Leah S LS Jacobs Elizabeth A EA Chen Alice Hm AH Mutha Sunita S

Health services research 20070401 2

<h4>Objective</h4>To determine if professional medical interpreters have a positive impact on clinical care for limited English proficiency (LEP) patients.<h4>Data sources</h4>A systematic literature search, limited to the English language, in PubMed and PsycINFO for publications between 1966 and September 2005, and a search of the Cochrane Library.<h4>Study design</h4>Any peer-reviewed article which compared at least two language groups, and contained data about professional medical interpreter ...[more]

PMID: 17362215

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Language barriers disrupt communication and impede informed consent for patients with limited English proficiency (LEP) undergoing healthcare procedures. Effective interventions for this disparity remain unclear. OBJECTIVE:Assess the impact of a bedside interpreter phone system intervention on informed consent for patients with LEP and compare outcomes to those of English speakers. DESIGN:Prospective, pre-post intervention implementation study using propensity analysis. SUBJECTS:Hospitalized patients undergoing invasive procedures on the cardiovascular, general surgery or orthopedic surgery floors. INTERVENTION:Installation of dual-handset interpreter phones at every bedside enabling 24-h immediate access to professional interpreters. MAIN MEASURES:Primary predictor: pre- vs. post-implementation group; secondary predictor: post-implementation patients with LEP vs. English speakers. Primary outcomes: three central informed consent elements, patient-reported understanding of the (1) reasons for and (2) risks of the procedure and (3) having had all questions answered. We considered consent adequately informed when all three elements were met. KEY RESULTS:We enrolled 152 Chinese- and Spanish-speaking patients with LEP (84 pre- and 68 post-implementation) and 86 English speakers. Post-implementation (vs. pre-implementation) patients with LEP were more likely to meet criteria for adequately informed consent (54% vs. 29%, p?=?0.001) and, after propensity score adjustment, had significantly higher odds of adequately informed consent (AOR 2.56; 95% CI, 1.15-5.72) as well as of each consent element individually. However, compared to post-implementation English speakers, post-implementation patients with LEP had significantly lower adjusted odds of adequately informed consent (AOR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.16-0.91). CONCLUSIONS:A bedside interpreter phone system intervention to increase rapid access to professional interpreters was associated with improvements in patient-reported informed consent and should be considered by hospitals seeking to improve care for patients with LEP; however, these improvements did not eliminate the language-based disparity. Additional clinician educational interventions and more language-concordant care may be necessary for informed consent to equal that for English speakers.

Project description:BackgroundLimited English proficiency (LEP) is common among hospitalized patients and may impact care. We synthesized the literature comparing clinical outcomes after in-hospital care for English-proficient(EP) versus LEP patients.MethodsThis systematic review searched PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science from database inception through June 7, 2020, to identify research investigating clinical outcomes in patients receiving hospital-based care (in the emergency department, inpatient ward, surgical/procedural suite, or intensive care unit) that compared patients with LEP to an EP group. We assessed mortality, length of stay (LOS), readmissions/revisits, and complications. Study quality was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.ResultsTwenty-six studies met eligibility criteria. Study settings and populations were heterogeneous. Determination of primary language varied; a majority of studies (16/26) used patient self-report directly or via hospital records. Of 16 studies examining LEP and all-cause mortality, 13 found no significant association. Of 17 studies measuring LOS, 9 found no difference, 4 found longer LOS, 3 found shorter LOS, and 1 had mixed LOS results among patients with LEP. Several investigations suggested that LOS differences may be mediated at the hospital level. Nine studies evaluated inpatient readmissions. Among patients with LEP, there was evidence for increased readmissions in the setting of chronic medical conditions such as heart failure, but no evidence for increased readmissions among cohorts undergoing surgeries/procedures or with acute medical conditions. Five studies evaluated complications or harm related to a hospitalization, and no differences were found between language groups.DiscussionThe research community lacks a standardized definition of LEP. Most studies did not find an association between English proficiency and mortality or complications. LOS findings were mixed and may be influenced at the hospital level. Differences in readmissions by language were concentrated in chronic medical conditions. Given the paucity of studies examining LEP populations, additional research is imperative.Prospero registration numberCRD42020143477.

Project description:Patients with limited English proficiency (LEP) experience poorer quality care and more adverse events in hospital. Consequently, there is interest in understanding the role of professional medical interpreters in efforts to improve patient safety.To describe the views of professional medical interpreters on their role in the delivery of safe patient care.Qualitative analysis of in-depth semi-structured interviews.15 professional medical interpreters affiliated with the Healthcare Interpretation Network in Toronto, Canada.Participants' views on their role in patient safety were analyzed and organized into themes.Professional medical interpreters described being uniquely situated to identify and prevent adverse events involving patients with LEP by: 1) facilitating communication and enhancing patients' comprehension, 2) giving voice to patients, and 3) speaking up about safety concerns. Participants described a tension between 'speaking up' and interpreters' ethical imperative to remain impartial. Interpreters also highlighted several challenges, including 4) medical hierarchy and healthcare providers' limited knowledge of the role of interpreters. These challenges introduced safety issues if providers asked interpreters to act outside of their scope of practice.Our study found that professional medical interpreters view their work as integral to the delivery of safe care to patients with LEP. In order to effectively engage in patient safety efforts together, interpreters and providers require a mutual understanding of their roles. Team hierarchy and limited provider knowledge of the role of interpreters can introduce safety concerns. In addition, interpreters describe a tension between "speaking up" about patient safety and the need for interpreters to remain impartial when facilitating communication. Healthcare institutions, providers, and interpreters must engage in discussion on how to best to "speak up" and integrate interpreters into safety efforts. Importantly, the benefits of partnering with interpreters can only be realized when providers consistently use their services.

Project description:BackgroundThere are approximately 25.6 million individuals with limited English proficiency (LEP) in the USA, and this number is increasing.ObjectiveInvestigate associations between LEP and access to care in adults.DesignCross-sectional nationally representative survey.ParticipantsAdults with (n = 18,908) and without (n = 98,060) LEP aged ≥ 18 years identified from the 2014-2018 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey MAIN MEASURES: Associations between LEP and access to healthcare and preventive services were evaluated with multivariable logistic regression models, stratified by age group (18-64 and ≥ 65 years). The official government definition of LEP (answers "not at all/not well/well" to the question "How well do you speak English?") was used. Access to care included having a usual source of care (and if so, distance from usual source of care, difficulty contacting usual source of care, and provision of extended hours), visiting a medical provider in the past 12 months, having to forego or delay care, and having trouble paying for medical bills. Preventive services included blood pressure and cholesterol check, flu vaccination, and cancer screening.Key resultsAdults aged 18-64 years with LEP were significantly more likely to lack a usual source of care (adjusted odds ratios [aOR] = 2.48; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.27-2.70), not have visited a medical provider (aOR = 2.02; CI = 1.89-2.16), and to be overdue for receipt of preventive services, including blood pressure check (aOR = 2.00; CI = 1.79-2.23), cholesterol check (aOR = 1.22; CI = 1.03-1.44), and colorectal cancer screening (aOR = 1.58; CI = 1.37-1.83) than adults without LEP. Results were similar among adults aged ≥ 65 years.ConclusionsAdults with LEP had consistently worse access to care than adults without LEP. System-level interventions, such as expanding access to health insurance coverage, providing language services, improving provider training in cultural competence, and increasing diversity in the medical workforce may minimize barriers and improve equity in access to care.

Dataset Information

Do professional interpreters improve clinical care for patients with limited English proficiency? A systematic review of the literature.

Objective

Data sources

Study design

Principal findings

Conclusions

Publications

Do professional interpreters improve clinical care for patients with limited English proficiency? A systematic review of the literature.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets