Does improved interpreter uptake reduce self-discharge rates in hospitalised patients? A successful hospital intervention explained

Background Aboriginal language interpreters are under-utilised in healthcare in northern Australia. Self-discharge from hospital is an adverse outcome occurring at high rates among Aboriginal people, with poor communication thought to be a contributor. We previously reported increased Aboriginal interpreter uptake and decreased rates of self-discharge during implementation of a 12-month hospital-based intervention. Interrupted time-series analysis showed sudden increase and up-trending improvement in interpreter use, and a corresponding decrease in self-discharge rates, during a 12-month intervention period (April 2018—March 2019) compared with a 24-month baseline period (April 2016 –March 2018). This paper aims to investigate reasons for these outcomes and explore a potential causal association between study activities and outcomes. Methods The study was implemented at the tertiary referral hospital in northern Australia. We used the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) as a framework to describe intervention components according to what, how, where, when, how much, tailoring, modifications and reach. Components of the study intervention were: employment of an Aboriginal Interpreter Coordinator, ‘Working with Interpreters’ training for healthcare providers, and championing of interpreter use by doctors. We evaluated the relative importance of intervention components according to TIDieR descriptors in relation to outcomes. Activities independent of the study that may have affected study findings were reviewed. The relationship between proportion of hospital separations among Aboriginal people ending in self-discharge and numbers of Aboriginal interpreter bookings made during April 2016-March 2019 was tested using linear regression. ‘Working with Interpreters’ training sessions were undertaken at a regional hospital as well as the tertiary hospital. Training evaluation comprised an anonymous online survey before the training, immediately after and then at six to eight months. Survey data from the sites were pooled for analysis. Results Employment of the Aboriginal Interpreter Coordinator was deemed the most important component of the intervention, based on reach compared to the other components, and timing of the changes in outcomes in relation to the employment period of the coordinator. There was an inverse association between interpreter bookings and self-discharge rate among Aboriginal inpatients throughout the baseline and intervention period (p = 0.02). This association, the timing of changes and assessment of intercurrent activities at the hospital indicated that the study intervention was likely to be casually related to the measured outcomes. Conclusions Communication in healthcare can be improved through targeted strategies, with associated improvements in patient outcomes. Health services with high interpreter needs would benefit from employing an interpreter coordinator.

Association of telemedicine use with disparities in cancer distress screening for patients with limited English proficiency.

147 Background: Distress has a significant impact on the quality of life for patients with cancer, however, implementation of such screening is variable. There is limited data in this area for patients who have limited English proficiency (LEP). Given data suggesting worsening disparities in medical care with telemedicine use, we evaluated the completion of distress screening and interpreter use for LEP patients with telemedicine. Methods: We analyzed assigned (complete and incomplete) questionnaires from 10/2019-3/2021 at Stanford Cancer Center (n = 181,105). We defined LEP as a patient electronic health record (EHR) demographic listing either a non-English preferred language or a request for an interpreter. We defined telemedicine as any video or phone visit. Data was analyzed with Fisher's test for differences. Given limitations in EHR data, we conducted a validation subset chart review for LEP patients in Thoracic and Gastrointestinal (GI) oncology which have the two highest % of LEP patients (n = 177 patients). The subset list was obtained for the above timeframe from the interpreter services group. We analyzed EHR notes from visit day for written mention of professional vs family interpreter use. Results: Overall, 14% of our cohort had LEP, highest prevalence in the Thoracic (21%) and GI groups (16%), with a total of 48 languages represented (Spanish, Mandarin & Vietnamese as the 3 most common). There was a significant difference in the English and Non-English groups in overall completion rates of the screening questionnaire (62% in English population vs 49% for LEP, p < 0.001). Completion rates for telemedicine vs. in person visits were overall higher for both English (78.9% vs. 55%, p < 0.001) and LEP (65.1% vs. 43.7%, p < 0.001) groups respectively. The overall screening completion rate for all visits was 57%, with a 62% completion rate with telemedicine and 51% completion with in-person visits (p = 0.2). In the LEP validation subset, there were 18 languages represented with the similar distribution as the larger cohort. Of all clinical notes reviewed, 48.8% included written mention of professional interpreter use, while 25.5% noted interpretation by a family member. There was no difference in professional interpreter use between visit types (̃50%), but with higher rate of family interpretation with telemedicine (35%) vs with in person visits (21%) (p = 0.04). Conclusions: Patients who have some level of limited English proficiency complete distress screening questionnaires less frequently compared to English speaking patients, which highlights the need to improve access to distress screening and supportive care. However, we found similar completion rates with in person vs telemedicine visits, with a signal for increased use of family members as interpreter with telemedicine. This warrants further analysis of the family role and patient understanding during these virtual visits.

The ethics of interpreter use

Consulting with a patient where there is a language barrier is unethical unless the barrier is overcome. Every patient with a language barrier should have this prominently documented on their file. Much of the literature relating to working with interpreters suggests that a professional interpreter should be used all the time, although in practice this is far from standard practice. In this paper we look at the issue using normative ethics, utilitarian ethics, an argument based on equality of health outcomes before making an argument for an approach based on clinical judgement in each consultation of what form of language assistance is acceptable.

Developing an Electronic Search Strategy Algorithm for Detecting Professional Interpreter Use among Patients with Limited English Proficiency: A Derivation and Validation Study

The authors have requested that this preprint be withdrawn due to erroneous posting.