Dataset Information

Engagement With a Health Information Technology-Augmented Self-Management Support Program in a Population With Limited English Proficiency: Observational Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Limited English proficiency (LEP) is an important driver of health disparities. Many successful patient-level interventions to prevent chronic disease progression and complications have used automated telephone self-management support, which relies on patient activation and communication to achieve improved health outcomes. It is not clear whether these interventions are similarly applicable to patients with LEP compared to patients with English proficiency.

Objective

The objectives of this study were as follows: (1) To examine the impact of LEP on patient engagement (primary outcome) with a 12-month language-concordant self-management program that included automated telephone self-management support, designed for patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). (2) To assess the impact of LEP on change in systolic blood pressure (SBP) and albuminuria (secondary outcomes) resulting from the self-management program.

Methods

This was a secondary analysis of the Kidney Awareness Registry and Education (KARE) pilot trial (NCT01530958) which was funded by the National Institutes of Health in August 2011, approved by the University of California Institutional Review Board in October 2011 (No. 11-07399), and executed between 2013 and 2015. Multivariable logistic and linear models were used to examine various facets of patient engagement with the CKD self-management support program by LEP status. Patient engagement was defined by patient's use of educational materials, completion of a health coaching action plan, and degree of participation with automated telephone self-management support. Changes in SBP and albuminuria at 12 months by LEP status were determined using multivariable linear mixed models.

Results

Of 137 study participants, 53 (38.7%) reported LEP, of which 45 (85%) were Spanish speaking and 8 (15%) Cantonese speaking. While patients with LEP and English proficiency similarly used the program's educational materials (85% [17/20] vs 88% [30/34], P=.69) and completed an action plan (81% [22/27] vs 74% [35/47], P=.49), those with LEP engaged more with the automated telephone self-management support component. Average call completion was 66% among patients with LEP compared with 57% among those with English proficiency; patients with LEP requested more health coach telephone calls (P=.08) and had a significantly longer average automated call duration (3.3 [SD 1.4] min vs 2.2 [1.1 min], P<.001), indicating higher patient engagement. Patients with LEP randomized to self-management support had a larger, though nonstatistically significant (P=.74), change in SBP (-4.5 mmHg; 95% CI -9.4 to 0.3) and albuminuria (-72.4 mg/dL; 95% CI -208.9 to 64.1) compared with patients with English proficiency randomized to self-management support (-2.1 mmHg; 95% CI -8.6 to 4.3 and -11.1 mg/dL; 95% CI -166.9 to 144.7).

Conclusions

Patients with LEP with CKD were equally or more engaged with a language-concordant, culturally appropriate telehealth intervention compared with their English-speaking counterparts. Augmented telehealth may be useful in mitigating communication barriers among patients with LEP.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01530958; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01530958.

SUBMITTER: Machen L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8205419 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundLimited English proficiency (LEP) is associated with poor health status and worse outcomes.ObjectiveTo examine disparities in hypertension between National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) respondents with LEP versus adequate English proficiency.DesignRetrospective analysis of multi-year survey data.ParticipantsAdults 18 years of age and older who participated in the NHANES survey during the period 2003-2012.Main measuresWe defined participants with LEP as anyone who completed the NHANES survey in a language other than English or with the support of an interpreter. Using logistic regression, we estimated the odds ratio for undiagnosed or uncontrolled hypertension (systolic blood pressure (SBP) > 140 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure (DBP) > 90 mmHg) among LEP participants relative to those with adequate English proficiency. We adjusted for sociodemographic, acculturation-related, and hypertension-related variables.Key resultsFourteen percent (n = 3,269) of the participants had limited English proficiency: 12.4% (n = 2906) used a Spanish questionnaire and 1.6% (n = 363) used an interpreter to complete the survey in another language. Those with LEP had higher odds of elevated blood pressure on physical examination (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.47 [1.07-2.03]). This finding persisted among participants using an interpreter (AOR = 1.88 [1.15-3.06]) but not among those using the Spanish questionnaire (AOR = 1.32 [0.98-1.80]). In a subgroup analysis, we found that the majority of uncontrolled hypertension was concentrated among individuals with a known diagnosis of hypertension (AOR = 1.80 [1.16-2.81]) rather than those with undiagnosed hypertension (AOR = 1.14 [0.74-1.75]). Interpreter use was associated with increased odds of uncontrolled hypertension, especially among patients who were not being medically managed for hypertension (AOR = 6.56 [1.30-33.12]).ConclusionsIn a nationally representative sample, participants with LEP were more likely to have poorly controlled hypertension than those with adequate English proficiency. LEP is an important driver of disparities in hypertension management and outcomes.

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.

Project description:BackgroundEarly readmission amongst older safety-net hospitalized adults is costly. Interventions to prevent early readmission have had mixed success. The role of perceived social support is unclear. We examined the association of perceived social support in 30-day readmission or death in older adults admitted to a safety-net hospital.MethodsThis is an observational cohort study derived from the Support From Hospital to Home for Elders (SHHE) trial. Participants were community-dwelling English, Spanish and Chinese speaking older adults admitted to medicine wards at an urban safety-net hospital in San Francisco. We assessed perceived social support using the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS). We defined high social support as the highest quartile of MSPSS. We ascertained 30-day readmission and mortality based on a combination of participant self-report, hospital and death records. We used multiple/multivariable logistic regression to adjust for patient demographics, health status, and health behaviors. We tested for whether race/ethnicity modified the effect high social support had on 30-day readmission or death by including a race-social support interaction term.ResultsParticipants (n = 674) had mean age of 66.2 (SD 9.0), with 18.8% White, 24.8% Black, 31.9% Asian, and 19.3% Latino. The 30-day readmission or death rate was 15.0%. Those with high social support had half the odds of readmission or death than those with low social support (OR = 0.47, 95% CI 0.26-0.88). Interaction analyses revealed race modified this association; higher social support was protective against readmission or death among minorities (AOR = 0.35, 95% CI 0.16-0.76) but increased likelihood of readmission or death among Whites (AOR = 3.7, 95% CI 1.07-12.9).ConclusionIn older safety-net patients nearing discharge, high perceived social support may protect against 30-day readmission or death among minorities. Assessing patients' social support may aid targeting of transitional care resources and intervention design. How perceived social support functions across racial/ethnic groups in health outcomes warrants further study.Trial registrationNIH trials registry number ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01221532 .

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.