Abstract
Background and ObjectivePatients with limited English proficiency (LEP) experience worse health care outcomes compared to English proficient (EP) patients, and professional interpretation is underutilized in clinical settings. The objectives of this study were to describe patterns of interpreter use in a pediatric emergency department (ED), to determine factors associated with its use, and to examine differences in outcomes between EP families and those with LEP. MethodsED encounters for LEP and EP patients were reviewed in a retrospective cohort study design over a 15 month period. Generalized estimating equations were used to compare patient encounters and factors associated with interpreter use. ResultsInterpreter use for families who preferred a non-English language was 45.4%. Use of interpretation was less likely during busier times of day (odds ratio [OR] 0.85, confidence interval [CI] 0.78–0.93), with a lower triage acuity (OR 0.66, CI 0.62–0.70), and with each increasing year of patient age (OR 0.97, CI 0.96–0.98). LEP patients who did not receive interpretation were less likely to be admitted than EP patients (OR 0.69, 0.62–0.78). Patients of LEP families, with or without interpretation, were more likely to be transferred to the ICU within 24 hours of admission than patients of EP families (OR 1.76, 1.07–2.90; 1.85, 1.08–3.18) suggesting that an aspect of clinical severity may have been missed in the ED. ConclusionsProfessional interpretation is currently underutilized in this ED for patients with LEP, and important differences in outcomes exist between LEP and EP patients. Factors associated with interpreter use will inform ongoing improvement efforts.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
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.