Green Alexander R, Ngo-Metzger Quyen, Legedza Anna T R, Massagli Michael P, Phillips Russell S, Iezzoni Lisa I
Institute for Health Policy, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114, USA.
J Gen Intern Med. 2005 Nov;20(11):1050-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.0223.x.
Patients with limited English proficiency (LEP) have more difficulty communicating with health care providers and are less satisfied with their care than others. Both interpreter- and language-concordant clinicians may help overcome these problems but few studies have compared these approaches.
To compare self-reported communication and visit ratings for LEP Asian immigrants whose visits involve either a clinic interpreter or a clinician speaking their native language.
Cross-sectional survey-response rate 74%.
Two thousand seven hundred and fifteen LEP Chinese and Vietnamese immigrant adults who received care at 11 community-based health centers across the U.S.
Five self-reported communication measures and overall rating of care.
Patients who used interpreters were more likely than language-concordant patients to report having questions about their care (30.1% vs 20.9%, P<.001) or about mental health (25.3% vs 18.2%, P=.005) they wanted to ask but did not. They did not differ significantly in their response to 3 other communication measures or their likelihood of rating the health care received as "excellent" or "very good" (51.7% vs 50.9%, P=.8). Patients who rated their interpreters highly ("excellent" or "very good") were more likely to rate the health care they received highly (adjusted odds ratio 4.8, 95% confidence interval, 2.3 to 10.1).
Assessments of communication and health care quality for outpatient visits are similar for LEP Asian immigrants who use interpreters and those whose clinicians speak their language. However, interpreter use may compromise certain aspects of communication. The perceived quality of the interpreter is strongly associated with patients' assessments of quality of care overall.
英语水平有限(LEP)的患者在与医疗服务提供者沟通方面存在更多困难,并且对医疗服务的满意度低于其他人。使用口译员和语言匹配的临床医生都可能有助于克服这些问题,但很少有研究对这两种方法进行比较。
比较自我报告的沟通情况以及对LEP亚洲移民就诊的评分,这些移民就诊时要么有诊所口译员,要么有说其母语的临床医生。
横断面调查,回复率74%。
2715名LEP华裔和越南裔成年移民,他们在美国11个社区卫生中心接受治疗。
五项自我报告的沟通指标以及对医疗服务的总体评分。
使用口译员的患者比语言匹配的患者更有可能报告对自己的治疗有疑问(30.1%对20.9%,P<0.001)或对心理健康有疑问(25.3%对18.2%,P = 0.005),这些疑问他们想问但没问。在对其他三项沟通指标的回答或给予所接受医疗服务“优秀”或“非常好”评分的可能性方面,他们没有显著差异(51.7%对50.9%,P = 0.8)。对口译员评价很高(“优秀”或“非常好”)的患者更有可能对他们所接受的医疗服务给予高度评价(调整后的优势比为4.8,95%置信区间为2.3至10.1)。
对于使用口译员的LEP亚洲移民和临床医生说其母语的LEP亚洲移民,门诊就诊时的沟通评估和医疗服务质量评估相似。然而,使用口译员可能会在沟通的某些方面产生影响。口译员的感知质量与患者对总体医疗服务质量的评估密切相关。