Award-winning Research Compares Results of Telephonic Interpretation vs. Bilingual Providers
Hospitals nationwide often consider alternatives for providing language interpretation to the Limited English Proficient patients who come to their institutions. However, there had been no large formal study to objectively measure comparative efficacy of different kinds of interpretation in healthcare settings before a study recently concluded at The Children’s Hospital Emergency Department in Denver.

This study, titled “A Randomized, Controlled, Noninferiority Trial of ED Modalities: Telephonic Live Interpretation vs. Bilingual Providers,” presented at the Pediatric Academic Societies annual meeting in May received the Fellows Clinical Research Award. The three researchers involved are Kristen Crossman, MD; Ethan Weiner, MD; and Louis Hampers, MD. Crossman and Hampers are associated with The Children’s Hospital, Denver, and Weiner with the NYC School of Medicine, New York City.

The 16-month study involved 1,201 hospital visits to the Pediatric Emergency Department at The Children’s Hospital, which was ranked in 2006 as the country’s seventh best in pediatrics by U.S. News & World Report in its annual “best hospitals” list. “Spanish-speaking caregivers were assigned to either telephonic or in-person interpreters in a random pattern which equalized time of day and day of the week during the study,” said Crossman. She noted that visits with a Spanish-speaking provider were considered the gold standard for comparisons. Of the 1,201 visits, 35 percent were with a bilingual provider, 34 percent with a telephonic interpreter and 31 percent with an in-person interpreter.

Interviews with families were conducted after each visit regarding three primary factors to determine the results of providing different types “The study concluded there was no statistical difference in caregiver satisfaction during patient encounters utilizing either in-person interpreters or telephonic interpreters.” of interpretation: 1) understanding of discharge diagnosis; 2) satisfaction with providers; and 3) overall visit satisfaction. “We asked questions to determine concordance with what the provider said the patient’s diagnosis was, any related instructions, as well as to determine if they were satisfied with the doctor and the overall visit,” said Crossman.

“The study concluded there was no statistical difference in caregiver satisfaction during patient encounters utilizing either in-person interpreters or telephonic interpreters.” Crossman continued.

“Patient caregivers are happy to have someone there for them, whether a telephonic or in-person interpreter, and that’s what is important.” Crossman concluded.

ABOUT KRISTEN CROSSMAN: Kristen L. Crossman, MD from Indiana University, MS from Purdue University. Crossman is a fellow in the department of pediatric emergency medicine at The Children’s Hospital, sponsored by The University of Colorado at Denver and Health Sciences Center.

ABOUT THE CHILDREN’S HOSPITAL: Founded in 1908, The Children’s Hospital provides complete pediatric care at its main campus in Denver and through a network that includes two emergency locations, three community based after-hours care sites, nine specialty care centers and more than 400 outreach clinics each year. A private, not-for-profit pediatric healthcare network, it has more than 1,000 pediatric specialists and more than 2,400 full-time employees.

Posted by Rapport International
Rapport International provides telephonic interpreting in hospital and business settings. For more information, contact us.