Comparing Remote Interpreter Modalities in the Pediatric Emergency Department

Completed · Not applicable

Conditions studied: Limited English Proficient Patients and Families

In brief

Professional interpretation improves quality of care for patients with limited English proficiency (LEP). However, many health care settings lack access to professional interpreters, and even in locations with good access, logistical factors and perceived barriers have limited their widespread use. Remote methods of professional interpretation, including telephone and video, hold great promise for expanding access, but only limited data exist on the relative impacts of these modalities on patient care and provider uptake. Comparing how these modalities impact multiple aspects of health care quality, including family comprehension, provider communication, and consistency of provider interpreter use will inform dissemination of strategies for delivery of safe, efficient, and equitable care to LEP families. Aim 1: To determine whether randomly assigned remote interpreter modality (telephone versus video) impacts parent-reported quality of communication and interpretation, diagnosis comprehension, and length of stay (LOS) among LEP Spanish-speaking families seen in a pediatric Emergency Department (ED). Hypothesis 1: Parent-reported quality of communication and interpretation and parent diagnosis comprehension will be higher among families assigned to video interpretation compared to telephone interpretation. Hypothesis 2: LOS will not differ between families assigned to video and telephone interpretation. Aim 2: To determine whether assigned interpreter modality is associated with provider decision to communicate without professional interpretation. Hypothesis 3: Parent-reported provider communication without professional interpretation (e.g. using the patient or a family member to interpret for some part of the visit) will be lower for families assigned to video interpretation compared to telephone interpretation.

Key facts

Study ID
NCT01986179
Run by
Seattle Children's Hospital
People needed
208
Starts
2014-02-01
Expected to finish
2014-08-01
Last updated by the study team
2015-05-20

Who can join

Age: 0 and older, up to 18. Sex: any. Healthy volunteers: not accepted.

You may qualify if…

You may not qualify if…

Where it is running

Full record on ClinicalTrials.gov

Trial information comes from ClinicalTrials.gov and is refreshed daily. TrialsForMe does not provide medical care and does not run the studies it lists.