Section of Pediatric Emergency Medicine, The Children's Hospital, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Denver, CO, USA.
J Immigr Minor Health. 2012 Aug;14(4):602-7. doi: 10.1007/s10903-011-9532-z.
Appropriate interpretation is imperative for families with limited English proficiency (LEP). We compared throughput times for ED visits involving families with LEP based on type of interpretation provided: in-person interpretation, remote telephonic interpretation or bilingual providers. This study is a secondary analysis of a prospective study of caretaker satisfaction with different interpreter modalities. We queried the medical record for event time stamps, clinical factors and disposition. The in-person cohort (116 min) had a significantly shorter total throughput time than telephonic (141 min) and bilingual provider (153 min) cohorts (P < 0.0001), due to a difference in time seen by provider to disposition. Time seen by provider to disposition remained statistically significantly shorter for the in-person cohort when compared to telephonic interpretation when controlling for potential confounders such as admission rate (P = 0.006). In-person interpretation significantly decreased ED throughput times and may be an important consideration in the choice of interpreter modality.
对于英语水平有限的家庭来说,适当的口译至关重要。我们比较了基于提供的口译类型(现场口译、远程电话口译或双语服务提供者),涉及英语水平有限家庭的 ED 就诊的吞吐量时间。这项研究是对不同口译模式照顾者满意度的前瞻性研究的二次分析。我们查询了病历中的事件时间戳、临床因素和处置情况。与电话(141 分钟)和双语服务提供者(153 分钟)队列相比,现场(116 分钟)队列的总吞吐量时间明显更短(P < 0.0001),这是由于提供者到处置的时间差异所致。在控制了入院率等潜在混杂因素后,与电话口译相比,现场口译提供者到处置的时间仍然明显更短(P = 0.006)。现场口译显著缩短了 ED 的吞吐量时间,可能是口译模式选择中的一个重要考虑因素。