49
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Hablamos Juntos ( Together We Speak): Interpreters, Provider Communication, and Satisfaction with Care

      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

          The Hablamos Juntos— Together We Speak (HJ)—national demonstration project targeted the improvement of language access for Spanish-speaking Latinos in areas with rapidly growing Latino populations. The objective of HJ was to improve doctor-patient communication by increasing access to and quality of interpreter services for Spanish-speaking patients.

          OBJECTIVE

          To investigate how access to interpreters for adult Spanish-speaking Latinos is associated with ratings of doctor/office staff communication and satisfaction with care.

          DESIGN

          Cross-sectional cohort study.

          PATIENTS

          A total of 1,590 Spanish-speaking Latino adults from eight sites across the United States who participated in the outpatient HJ evaluation.

          MEASUREMENTS

          We analyzed two multi-item measures of doctor communication (4 items) and office staff helpfulness (2 items), and one global item of satisfaction with care by interpreter use. We performed regression analyses to control for patient sociodemographic characteristics, survey year, and clustering at the site of care.

          RESULTS

          Ninety-five percent of participants were born outside the US, 81% were females, and survey response rates ranged from 45% to 85% across sites. In this cohort of Spanish-speaking patients, those who needed and always used interpreters reported better experiences with care than their counterparts who needed but had interpreters unavailable. Patients who always used an interpreter had better adjusted ratings of doctor communication [effect size (ES = 0.51)], office staff helpfulness (ES = 0.37), and satisfaction with care (ES = 0.37) than patients who needed but did not always use an interpreter. Patients who needed and always used interpreters also reported better experiences with care in all three domains measured [doctor communication (ES = 0.30), office staff helpfulness (ES = 0.21), and satisfaction with care (ES = 0.23)] than patients who did not need interpreters.

          CONCLUSIONS

          Among adult Spanish-speaking Latinos, interpreter use is independently associated with higher satisfaction with doctor communication, office staff helpfulness, and ambulatory care. Increased attention to the need for effective interpreter services is warranted in areas with rapidly growing Spanish-speaking populations.

          Related collections

          Most cited references21

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

            Are Latinos less satisfied with communication by health care providers?

            To examine associations of patient ratings of communication by health care providers with patient language (English vs Spanish) and ethnicity (Latino vs white). A random sample of patients receiving medical care from a physician group association concentrated on the West Coast was studied. A total of 7,093 English and Spanish language questionnaires were returned for an overall response rate of 59%. Five questions asking patients to rate communication by their health care providers were examined in this study. All five questions were administered with a 7-point response scale. We estimated the associations of satisfaction ratings with language (English vs Spanish) and ethnicity (white vs Latino) using ordinal logistic models, controlling for age and gender. Latinos responding in Spanish (Latino/Spanish) were significantly more dissatisfied compared with Latinos responding in English (Latino/English) and non-Latino whites responding in English (white) when asked about: (1) the medical staff listened to what they say (29% vs 17% vs 13% rated this "very poor," "poor," or "fair"; p <.01); (2) answers to their questions (27% vs 16% vs 12%; p <.01); (3) explanations about prescribed medications (22% vs 19% vs 14%; p <.01); (4) explanations about medical procedures and test results (36% vs 21% vs 17%; p <.01); and (5) reassurance and support from their doctors and the office staff (37% vs 23% vs 18%; p <.01). This study documents that Latino/Spanish respondents are significantly more dissatisfied with provider communication than Latino/English and white respondents. These results suggest Spanish-speaking Latinos may be at increased risk of lower quality of care and poor health outcomes. Efforts to improve the quality of communication with Spanish-speaking Latino patients in outpatient health care settings are needed.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Psychometric properties of the Consumer Assessment of Health Plans Study (CAHPS) 2.0 adult core survey.

              To estimate the reliability and validity of survey measures used to evaluate health plans and providers from the consumer's perspective. Members (166,074) of 306 U.S. health plans obtained from the National CAHPS Benchmarking Database 2.0, a voluntary effort in which sponsors of CAHPS surveys contribute data to a common repository. Members of privately insured health plans serving public and private employers across the United States were surveyed by mail and telephone. Interitem correlations and correlations of items with the composite scores were estimated. Plan-level and internal consistency reliability are estimated. Multivariate associations of composite measures with global ratings are also examined to assess construct validity. Confirmatory factor analysis is used to examine the factor structure of the measure. Plan-level reliability of all CAHPS 2.0 reporting composites is high with the given sample sizes. Fewer than 170 responses per plan would achieve plan-level reliability of .70 for the five composites. Two of the composites display high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha > or = .75), while responses to items in the other three composites were not as internally consistent (Cronbach's alpha from .58 to .62). A five-factor model representing the CAHPS 2.0 composites fits the data better than alternative two- and three-factor models. Two of the five CAHPS 2.0 reporting composites have high internal consistency and plan-level reliability. The other three summary measures were reliable at the plan level and approach acceptable levels of internal consistency. Some of the items that form the CAHPS 2.0 adult core survey, such as the measure of waiting times in the doctor's office, could be improved. The five-dimension model of consumer assessments best fits the data among the privately insured; therefore, consumer reports using CAHPS surveys should provide feedback using five composites.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                +1-310-7943938 , +1-310-7946097 , gemoreno@mednet.ucla.edu
                Journal
                J Gen Intern Med
                Journal of General Internal Medicine
                Springer-Verlag (New York )
                0884-8734
                1525-1497
                12 August 2010
                12 August 2010
                December 2010
                : 25
                : 12
                : 1282-1288
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Robert Wood Johnson Clinical Scholars Program at UCLA, 911 Broxton Avenue, 3rd Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90025 USA
                [2 ]Department of Family Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA USA
                [3 ]Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA USA
                [4 ]Department of Health Services, School of Public Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WA USA
                Article
                1467
                10.1007/s11606-010-1467-x
                2988148
                20703951
                bd9d1cb7-6788-4760-8cb9-27b844a1b0af
                © The Author(s) 2010
                History
                : 17 September 2009
                : 15 February 2010
                : 1 July 2010
                Categories
                Original Research
                Custom metadata
                © Society of General Internal Medicine 2010

                Internal medicine
                disparities,limited english proficient,interpreter services,latino population,immigrants,doctor-patient communication

                Comments

                Comment on this article