The Impact of Medical Interpretation Method on Time and Errors

DSpace/Manakin Repository

The Impact of Medical Interpretation Method on Time and Errors

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Gany, Francesca
dc.contributor.author Kapelusznik, Luciano
dc.contributor.author Gonzalez, Javier
dc.contributor.author Orta, Lurmag Y.
dc.contributor.author Tseng, Chi-Hong
dc.contributor.author Changrani, Jyotsna
dc.contributor.author Prakash, Kavitha
dc.date.accessioned 2010-12-21T18:47:09Z
dc.date.issued 2007
dc.identifier.citation Gany, Francesca, Luciano Kapelusznik, Kavitha Prakash, Javier Gonzalez, Lurmag Y. Orta, Chi-Hong Tseng, and Jyotsna Changrani. 2007. The impact of medical interpretation method on time and errors. Journal of General Internal Medicine 22(Suppl 2): 319-323. en_US
dc.identifier.issn 0884-8734 en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:4632592
dc.description.abstract Background: Twenty-two million Americans have limited English proficiency. Interpreting for limited English proficient patients is intended to enhance communication and delivery of quality medical care. Objective: Little is known about the impact of various interpreting methods on interpreting speed and errors. This investigation addresses this important gap. Design: Four scripted clinical encounters were used to enable the comparison of equivalent clinical content. These scripts were run across four interpreting methods, including remote simultaneous, remote consecutive, proximate consecutive, and proximate ad hoc interpreting. The first 3 methods utilized professional, trained interpreters, whereas the ad hoc method utilized untrained staff. Measurements: Audiotaped transcripts of the encounters were coded, using a prespecified algorithm to determine medical error and linguistic error, by coders blinded to the interpreting method. Encounters were also timed. Results: Remote simultaneous medical interpreting (RSMI) encounters averaged 12.72 vs 18.24 minutes for the next fastest mode (proximate ad hoc) (p = 0.002). There were 12 times more medical errors of moderate or greater clinical significance among utterances in non-RSMI encounters compared to RSMI encounters (p = 0.0002). Conclusions: Whereas limited by the small number of interpreters involved, our study found that RSMI resulted in fewer medical errors and was faster than non-RSMI methods of interpreting. en_US
dc.language.iso en_US en_US
dc.publisher Springer-Verlag en_US
dc.relation.isversionof doi:10.1007/s11606-007-0361-7 en_US
dc.relation.hasversion http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2078536/pdf/ en_US
dash.license LAA
dc.subject interpreting en_US
dc.subject medical errors en_US
dc.subject access to care en_US
dc.subject language en_US
dc.subject immigrant health en_US
dc.title The Impact of Medical Interpretation Method on Time and Errors en_US
dc.type Journal Article en_US
dc.description.version Version of Record en_US
dc.relation.journal Journal of General Internal Medicine en_US
dash.depositing.author Prakash, Kavitha
dc.date.available 2010-12-21T18:47:09Z
dash.affiliation.other HMS^Medicine- Beth Israel-Deaconess en_US

Files in this item

Files Size Format View
2078536.pdf 114.7Kb PDF View/Open

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

 
 

Search DASH


Advanced Search
 
 

Submitters