46
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Language Barriers, Physician-Patient Language Concordance, and Glycemic Control Among Insured Latinos with Diabetes: The Diabetes Study of Northern California (DISTANCE)

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          ABSTRACT

          BACKGROUND

          A significant proportion of US Latinos with diabetes have limited English proficiency (LEP). Whether language barriers in health care contribute to poor glycemic control is unknown.

          OBJECTIVE

          To assess the association between limited English proficiency (LEP) and glycemic control and whether this association is modified by having a language-concordant physician.

          DESIGN

          Cross-sectional, observational study using data from the 2005–2006 Diabetes Study of Northern California (DISTANCE). Patients received care in a managed care setting with interpreter services and self-reported their English language ability and the Spanish language ability of their physician. Outcome was poor glycemic control (glycosylated hemoglobin A1c > 9%).

          KEY RESULTS

          The unadjusted percentage of patients with poor glycemic control was similar among Latino patients with LEP (n = 510) and Latino English-speakers (n = 2,683), and higher in both groups than in whites (n = 3,545) (21% vs 18% vs. 10%, p < 0.005). This relationship differed significantly by patient-provider language concordance (p < 0.01 for interaction). LEP patients with language-discordant physicians (n = 115) were more likely than LEP patients with language-concordant physicians (n = 137) to have poor glycemic control (27.8% vs 16.1% p = 0.02). After controlling for potential demographic and clinical confounders, LEP Latinos with language-concordant physicians had similar odds of poor glycemic control as Latino English speakers (OR 0.89; CI 0.53–1.49), whereas LEP Latinos with language-discordant physicians had greater odds of poor control than Latino English speakers (OR 1.76; CI 1.04–2.97). Among LEP Latinos, having a language discordant physician was associated with significantly poorer glycemic control (OR 1.98; CI 1.03–3.80).

          CONCLUSIONS

          Language barriers contribute to health disparities among Latinos with diabetes. Limited English proficiency is an independent predictor for poor glycemic control among insured US Latinos with diabetes, an association not observed when care is provided by language-concordant physicians. Future research should determine if strategies to increase language-concordant care improve glycemic control among US Latinos with LEP.

          Related collections

          Most cited references46

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Effects of limited English proficiency and physician language on health care comprehension.

          To determine the effect of limited English proficiency on medical comprehension in the presence and absence of language-concordant physicians. A telephone survey of 1,200 Californians was conducted in 11 languages. The survey included 4 items on medical comprehension: problems understanding a medical situation, confusion about medication use, trouble understanding labels on medication, and bad reactions to medications. Respondents were also asked about English proficiency and whether their physicians spoke their native language. We analyzed the relationship between English proficiency and medical comprehension using multivariate logistic regression. We also performed a stratified analysis to explore the effect of physician language concordance on comprehension. Forty-nine percent of the 1,200 respondents were defined as limited English proficient (LEP). Limited English-proficient respondents were more likely than English-proficient respondents to report problems understanding a medical situation (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 3.2/confidence interval [CI] 2.1, 4.8), trouble understanding labels (AOR 1.5/CI 1.0, 2.3), and bad reactions (AOR 2.3/CI 1.3, 4.4). Among respondents with language-concordant physicians, LEP respondents were more likely to have problems understanding a medical situation (AOR 2.2/CI 1.2, 3.9). Among those with language-discordant physicians, LEP respondents were more likely to report problems understanding a medical situation (AOR 9.4/CI 3.7, 23.8), trouble understanding labels (AOR 4.2/CI 1.7, 10.3), and bad medication reactions (AOR 4.1/CI 1.2, 14.7). Limited English proficiency is a barrier to medical comprehension and increases the risk of adverse medication reactions. Access to language-concordant physicians substantially mitigates but does not eliminate language barriers.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Improvements in diabetes processes of care and intermediate outcomes: United States, 1988-2002.

            Progress of diabetes care is a subject of public health concern. To assess changes in quality of diabetes care in the United States by using standardized measures. National population-based, serial cross-sectional surveys. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (1988-1994 and 1999-2002) and the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (1995 and 2002). Survey participants 18 to 75 years of age who reported a diagnosis of diabetes. Glycemic control, blood pressure, low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol level, annual cholesterol level monitoring, and annual foot and dilated eye examination, as defined by the National Diabetes Quality Improvement Alliance measures. In the past decade, the proportion of persons with diabetes with poor glycemic control (hemoglobin A1c > 9%) showed a nonstatistically significant decrease of 3.9% (95% CI, -10.4% to 2.5%), while the proportion of persons with fair or good lipid control (LDL cholesterol level < 3.4 mmol/L [<130 mg/dL]) had a statistically significant increase of 21.9% (CI, 12.4% to 31.3%). Mean LDL cholesterol level decreased by 0.5 mmol/L (18.8 mg/dL). Although mean hemoglobin A1c did not change, the proportion of persons with hemoglobin A(1c) of 6% to 8% increased from 34.2% to 47.0%. The blood pressure distribution did not change. Annual lipid testing, dilated eye examination, and foot examination increased by 8.3% (CI, 4.0% to 12.7%), 4.5% (CI, 0.5% to 8.5%), and 3.8% (CI, -0.1% to 7.7%), respectively. The proportion of persons reporting annual influenza vaccination and aspirin use improved by 6.8 percentage points (CI, 2.9 percentage points to 10.7 percentage points) and 13.1 percentage points (CI, 5.4 percentage points to 20.7 percentage points), respectively. Data are self-reported, and the surveys do not have all National Diabetes Quality Improvement Alliance indicators. Diabetes processes of care and intermediate outcomes have improved nationally in the past decade. But 2 in 5 persons with diabetes still have poor LDL cholesterol control, 1 in 3 persons still has poor blood pressure control, and 1 in 5 persons still has poor glycemic control.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Providing High-Quality Care for Limited English Proficient Patients: The Importance of Language Concordance and Interpreter Use

              Background Provider–patient language discordance is related to worse quality care for limited English proficient (LEP) patients who speak Spanish. However, little is known about language barriers among LEP Asian-American patients. Objective We examined the effects of language discordance on the degree of health education and the quality of interpersonal care that patients received, and examined its effect on patient satisfaction. We also evaluated how the presence/absence of a clinic interpreter affected these outcomes. Design Cross-sectional survey, response rate 74%. Participants A total of 2,746 Chinese and Vietnamese patients receiving care at 11 health centers in 8 cities. Measurements Provider–patient language concordance, health education received, quality of interpersonal care, patient ratings of providers, and the presence/absence of a clinic interpreter. Regression analyses were used to adjust for potential confounding. Results Patients with language-discordant providers reported receiving less health education (β = 0.17, p < 0.05) compared to those with language-concordant providers. This effect was mitigated with the use of a clinic interpreter. Patients with language-discordant providers also reported worse interpersonal care (β = 0.28, p < 0.05), and were more likely to give low ratings to their providers (odds ratio [OR] = 1.61; CI = 0.97–2.67). Using a clinic interpreter did not mitigate these effects and in fact exacerbated disparities in patients’ perceptions of their providers. Conclusion Language barriers are associated with less health education, worse interpersonal care, and lower patient satisfaction. Having access to a clinic interpreter can facilitate the transmission of health education. However, in terms of patients’ ratings of their providers and the quality of interpersonal care, having an interpreter present does not serve as a substitute for language concordance between patient and provider.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                +415-206-5394 , +415-206-5586 , afernandez@medsfgh.ucsf.edu
                Journal
                J Gen Intern Med
                Journal of General Internal Medicine
                Springer-Verlag (New York )
                0884-8734
                1525-1497
                29 September 2010
                29 September 2010
                February 2011
                : 26
                : 2
                : 170-176
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA USA
                [2 ]UCSF Center for Vulnerable Populations, San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, CA USA
                [3 ]California Diabetes Program, California Department of Public Health, San Francisco, CA USA
                [4 ]Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente, Oakland, CA USA
                [5 ]Department of Psychiatry, University of California, Oakland, CA USA
                [6 ]UCSF, Box 1364, San Francisco, CA 94143 USA
                Article
                1507
                10.1007/s11606-010-1507-6
                3019330
                20878497
                8e2e01a0-d534-4af5-8764-4d57e25dd0ab
                © The Author(s) 2010
                History
                : 5 March 2010
                : 2 August 2010
                : 6 August 2010
                Categories
                Original Research
                Custom metadata
                © Society of General Internal Medicine 2011

                Internal medicine
                health communication,health disparities,limited english proficiency,language,latino/hispanic,diabetes

                Comments

                Comment on this article