Examining Effectiveness of Medical Interpreters in Emergency Departments for Spanish-Speaking Patients With Limited English Proficiency: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial
Study objectives
This study examines whether availability of in-person professional interpreter services during emergency department (ED) visits affects satisfaction of limited English proficient patients and their health providers, using a randomized controlled trial.
Methods
We randomized time blocks during which in-person professional interpreters were available to Spanish-speaking patients in the EDs of 2 central New Jersey hospitals. We assessed the intervention's effects on patient and provider satisfaction through a multilevel regression model that accounted for the nesting of patients within time blocks and controlled for the patient's age and sex, hospital, and when the visit occurred (weekday or weekend).
Results
During the 7-month intake period, 242 patients were enrolled during 101 treatment time blocks and 205 patients were enrolled during 100 control time blocks. Regression-adjusted results indicate that 96% of treatment group patients were “very satisfied” (on a 5-point Likert scale) with their ability to communicate during the visit compared with 24% of control group patients (odds ratio=72; 95% confidence interval 31 to 167). (Among control group members who were not very satisfied, responses ranged from “very dissatisfied” to “somewhat satisfied.”) Similarly, physicians, triage nurses, and discharge nurses were more likely to be very satisfied with communication during treatment time blocks than during control time blocks. We did not assess acuity of illness or global measures of satisfaction.
Conclusion
Use of in-person, professionally trained medical interpreters significantly increases Spanish-speaking limited English proficient patients' and their health providers' satisfaction with communication during ED visits.
To access this article, please choose from the options below
Provide feedback on this article at the journal's Web site, www.annemergmed.com.
A podcast for this article is available at www.annemergmed.com.
Supervising editor: Donald M. Yealy, MD
Author contributions: ADB, SD, and NV-S conceived the study, designed the trial, and obtained research funding. ADB recruited participating hospitals and oversaw recruitment of field staff and interviewers. ADB, KZ, and RE completed institutional review board applications and reporting. ADB, SD, and KZ supervised the conduct of the trial and data collection. NV-S carried out randomization procedures and led statistical analyses, with assistance from SD and SA. ADB had primary responsibility for drafting the article, with all authors contributing substantially to the original draft and subsequent revisions. ADB takes responsibility for the paper as a whole.
Funding and support: By Annals policy, all authors are required to disclose any and all commercial, financial, and other relationships in any way related to the subject of this article that might create any potential conflict of interest. See the Manuscript Submission Agreement in this issue for examples of specific conflicts covered by this statement. This project was funded under grant number 55879 by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
Please see page 249 for the Editor's Capsule Summary of this article.
Publication date: Available online August 3, 2010.
PII: S0196-0644(10)00557-3
doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2010.05.032
© 2010 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
