Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA 94143, USA.
Patient Educ Couns. 2010 Nov;81(2):222-8. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2010.02.005. Epub 2010 Mar 11.
To assess the association of limited English proficiency (LEP) and physician language concordance with patient reports of clinical interactions.
Cross-sectional survey of 8638 Kaiser Permanente Northern California patients with diabetes. Patient responses were used to define English proficiency and physician language concordance. Quality of clinical interactions was based on 5 questions drawn from validated scales on communication, 2 on trust, and 3 on discrimination.
Respondents included 8116 English-proficient and 522 LEP patients. Among LEP patients, 210 were language concordant and 153 were language discordant. In fully adjusted models, LEP patients were more likely than English-proficient patients to report suboptimal interactions on 3 out of 10 outcomes, including 1 communication and 2 discrimination items. In separate analyses, LEP-discordant patients were more likely than English-proficient patients to report suboptimal clinician-patient interactions on 7 out of 10 outcomes, including 2 communication, 2 trust, and 3 discrimination items. In contrast, LEP-concordant patients reported similar interactions to English-proficient patients.
Reports of suboptimal interactions among patients with LEP were more common among those with language-discordant physicians.
Expanding access to language concordant physicians may improve clinical interactions among patients with LEP. Quality and performance assessments should consider physician-patient language concordance.
评估有限英语水平(LEP)和医生语言一致性与患者临床互动报告之间的关联。
对加利福尼亚州北部 Kaiser Permanente 的 8638 名糖尿病患者进行横断面调查。使用患者的回答来定义英语熟练程度和医生语言一致性。临床互动质量基于从沟通、信任和歧视 3 个方面的 5 个验证过的量表中的 5 个问题来评估。
受访者包括 8116 名英语熟练患者和 522 名 LEP 患者。在 LEP 患者中,有 210 名语言一致,153 名语言不一致。在完全调整的模型中,与英语熟练患者相比,LEP 患者更有可能报告 10 项结果中的 3 项次互动不佳,包括 1 项沟通和 2 项歧视项目。在单独的分析中,与英语熟练患者相比,LEP 不一致的患者更有可能报告 10 项结果中的 7 项次临床医生-患者互动不佳,包括 2 项沟通、2 项信任和 3 项歧视项目。相比之下,与英语熟练患者相比,LEP 一致的患者报告了类似的互动。
与 LEP 患者报告的次优互动更常见于语言不一致的医生。
扩大与语言一致的医生的接触可能会改善 LEP 患者的临床互动。质量和绩效评估应考虑医生-患者语言一致性。