Dataset Information

Remote interpreting in primary care settings: a feasibility trial in Germany.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Global migration trends have led to a more diverse population in health care services everywhere, which in turn has set off a paradigm shift away from medical paternalism toward more patient autonomy. Consequently, physicians need to provide a more precise patient-centred healthcare. Professional interpreting appears to play a crucial part in tackling the challenges of language barriers adequately. The aim of this study was to conduct process evaluation through the implementing of video remote interpreting (VR) and telephone remote interpreting (TR) within primary care facilities in the northern German metropolis of Hamburg.

Methods

We conducted a three-armed exploratory pilot trial, which compared VR to TR and to a control group (CG) in different primary care settings. We assessed feasibility of implementation, as well as the acceptance of interpreting tools among their users. In addition, we compared the quality of communication as perceived by patients and physicians, as well as the enabling of patient-centred medicine over all three study groups using quantitative questionnaires.

Results

13 practices (7 GPs, 3 Gynaecologists, 3 Paediatricians) took part in this trial. 183 interpreting calls were documented, 178 physicians as well as 127 patients answered their respective questionnaires. The implementation of the VR- und TR-tools went smoothly and they were broadly accepted by their users. However, the tools were used significantly less often than we had anticipated. With regards to quantitative questionnaires, VR scored significantly better than the control group in terms of the perceived quality of communication by both, patients and physicians and enabled of patient-centred medicine.

Conclusion

Our main findings were the discrepancy between the assumed high demand of professional interpreting solutions on the one hand and the low willingness of practices to participate on the other. The rather low utilisation rates were also noteworthy. This discrepancy indicates a lack of awareness concerning the adverse effects of using informal or no interpreter in medical settings, which needs to be rectified. Due to the small sample size, all statistical results must be viewed with caution. However, our results show that remote interpreting represents a promising approach to tackling language barriers in primary care settings.

SUBMITTER: Fiedler J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8785004 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Rural children are more at risk for childhood obesity but may have difficulty participating in pediatric weight management clinical trials if in-person visits are required. Remote assessment of height and weight observed via videoconferencing may provide a solution by improving the accuracy of self-reported data. This study aims to validate a low-cost, scalable video-assisted protocol for remote height and weight measurements in children and caregivers. Families were provided with low-cost digital scales and tape measures and a standardized protocol for remote measurements. Thirty-three caregiver and child (6-11 years old) dyads completed remote (at home) height and weight measurements while being observed by research staff via videoconferencing, as well as in-person measurements with research staff. We compared the overall and absolute mean differences in child and caregiver weight, height, body mass index (BMI), and child BMI adjusted Z-score (BMIaz) between remote and in-person measurements using paired samples t-tests and one sample t-tests, respectively. Bland-Altman plots were used to estimate the limits of agreement (LOA) and assess systematic bias. Simple regression models were used to examine associations between measurement discrepancies and sociodemographic factors and number of days between measurements. Overall mean differences in child and caregiver weight, height, BMI, and child BMIaz were not significantly different between remote and in-person measurements. LOAs were - 2.1 and 1.7 kg for child weight, - 5.2 and 4.0 cm for child height, - 1.5 and 1.7 kg/m2 for child BMI, - 0.4 and 0.5 SD for child BMIaz, - 3.0 and 2.8 kg for caregiver weight, - 2.9 and 3.9 cm for caregiver height, and - 2.1 and 1.6 kg/m2 for caregiver BMI. Absolute mean differences were significantly different between the two approaches for all measurements. Child and caregiver age were each significantly associated with differences between remote and in-person caregiver height measurements; there were no significant associations with other measurement discrepancies. Remotely observed weight and height measurements using non-research grade equipment may be a feasible and valid approach for pediatric clinical trials in rural communities. However, researchers should carefully evaluate their measurement precision requirements and intervention effect size to determine whether remote height and weight measurements suit their studies.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04142034 (29/10/2019).

Project description:BackgroundWith increasing globalisation, the challenges of providing accessible and safe healthcare to all are great. Studies show that there are substantial numbers of people who are not fluent in English to a level where they can make best use of health services. We examined how health professionals manage language barriers in a consultation.Methods and findingsThis was a cross-sectional study in 41 UK general practices . Health professionals completed a proforma for a randomly allocated consultation session. Seventy-seven (63%) practitioners responded, from 41(59%) practices. From 1008 consultations, 555 involved patients who did not have English as a first language; 710 took place in English; 222 were in other languages, the practitioner either communicating with the patient in their own language/using an alternative language. Seven consultations were in a mixture of English/patient's own language. Patients' first languages numbered 37 (apart from English), in contrast to health practitioners, who declared at least a basic level of proficiency in 22 languages other than English. The practitioner's reported proficiency in the language used was at a basic level in 24 consultations, whereas in 21, they reported having no proficiency at all. In 57 consultations, a relative/friend interpreted and in 6, a bilingual member of staff/community worker was used. Only in 6 cases was a professional interpreter booked. The main limitation was that only one random session was selected and assessment of patient/professional fluency in English was subjective.ConclusionsIt would appear that professional interpreters are under-used in relation to the need for them, with bilingual staff/family and friends being used commonly. In many cases where the patient spoke little/no English, the practitioner consulted in the patient's language but this approach was also used where reported practitioner proficiency was low. Further research in different setting is needed to substantiate these findings.