Abstract

While Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 mandates use of interpreters for patients with limited English proficiency, significant disparities persist in intensive postsurgical care. We present the case of a 60-year-old Vietnamese-speaking man with a Type A aortic dissection requiring postoperative mechanical ventilation and stroke care. Despite use of a remote video interpreter, our language-discordant nursing and physician providers faced challenges in managing agitation and delirium and assessing neurological function. This case highlights the need for adequate interpretation equipment, linguistic diversity among providers, and interventions to promote and enable consistent certified and professional medical interpreter use.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.