Alicia Fernandez

Effects of Limited English Proficiency and Physician Language on Health Care Comprehension

AbstractOBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of limited English proficiency on medical comprehension in the presence and absence of language-concordant physicians. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A telephone survey of 1,200 Californians was conducted in 11 languages. The survey included 4 items on medical comprehension: problems understanding a medical situation, confusion about medication use, trouble understanding labels on medication, and bad reactions to medications. Respondents were also asked about English proficiency and whether their physicians spoke their native language. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We analyzed the relationship between English proficiency and medical comprehension using multivariate logistic regression. We also performed a stratified analysis to explore the effect of physician language concordance on comprehension. Forty-nine percent of the 1,200 respondents were defined as limited English proficient (LEP). Limited English-proficient respondents were more likely than English-proficient respondents to report problems understanding a medical situation (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 3.2/confidence interval [CI] 2.1, 4.8), trouble understanding labels (AOR 1.5/CI 1.0, 2.3), and bad reactions (AOR 2.3/CI 1.3, 4.4). Among respondents with language-concordant physicians, LEP respondents were more likely to have problems understanding a medical situation (AOR 2.2/CI 1.2, 3.9). Among those with language-discordant physicians, LEP respondents were more likely to report problems understanding a medical situation (AOR 9.4/CI 3.7, 23.8), trouble understanding labels (AOR 4.2/CI 1.7, 10.3), and bad medication reactions (AOR 4.1/CI 1.2, 14.7). CONCLUSION: Limited English proficiency is a barrier to medical comprehension and increases the risk of adverse medication reactions. Access to language-concordant physicians substantially mitigates but does not eliminate language barriers.

Physician Language Ability and Cultural Competence: An Exploratory Study of Communication with Spanish-speaking Patients

AbstractOBJECTIVE: We studied physician-patient dyads to determine how physician self-rated Spanish-language ability and cultural competence affect Spanish-speaking patients’ reports of interpersonal processes of care. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Questionnaire study of 116 Spanish-speaking patients with diabetes and 48 primary care physicians (PCPs) at a public hospital with interpreter services. MEASURES: Primary care physicians rated their Spanish ability on a 5-point scale and cultural competence by rating: 1) their understanding of the health-related cultural beliefs of their Spanish-speaking patients; and 2) their effectiveness with Latino patients, each on a 4-point scale. We assessed patients’ experiences using the interpersonal processes of care (IPC) in diverse populations instrument. Primary care physician responses were dichotomized, as were IPC scale scores (optimal vs nonoptimal). We analyzed the relationship between language and two cultural competence items and IPC, and a summary scale and IPC, using multivariate models to adjust for known confounders of communication. RESULTS: Greater language fluency was strongly associated with optimal IPC scores in the domain of elicitation of and responsiveness to patients, problems and concerns [Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR], 5.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.59 to 17.27]. Higher score on a language-culture summary scale was associated with three IPC domains — elicitation/responsiveness (AOR, 6.34; 95% CI, 2.1 to 19.3), explanation of condition (AOR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.0 to 7.34), and patient empowerment (AOR, 3.13; 95% CI, 1.2 to 8.19)—and not associated with two more-technical communication domains. CONCLUSION: Physician self-rated language ability and cultural competence are independently associated with patients’ reports of interpersonal process of care in patient-centered domains. Our study provides empiric support for the importance of language and cultural competence in the primary care of Spanish-speaking patients.

Getting by: underuse of interpreters by resident physicians.

BackgroundLanguage barriers complicate physician–patient communication and adversely affect healthcare quality. Research suggests that physicians underuse interpreters despite evidence of benefits and even when services are readily available. The reasons underlying the underuse of interpreters are poorly understood.ObjectiveTo understand the decision-making process of resident physicians when communicating with patients with limited English proficiency (LEP).DesignQualitative study using in-depth interviews.ParticipantsInternal medicine resident physicians (n = 20) from two urban teaching hospitals with excellent interpreter services.ApproachAn interview guide was used to explore decision making about interpreter use.ResultsFour recurrent themes emerged: 1) Resident physicians recognized that they underused professional interpreters, and described this phenomenon as “getting by;” 2) Resident physicians made decisions about interpreter use by weighing the perceived value of communication in clinical decision making against their own time constraints; 3) The decision to call an interpreter could be preempted by the convenience of using family members or the resident physician’s use of his/her own second language skills; 4) Resident physicians normalized the underuse of professional interpreters, despite recognition that patients with LEP are not receiving equal care.ConclusionsAlthough previous research has identified time constraints and lack of availability of interpreters as reasons for their underuse, our data suggest that the reasons are far more complex. Residents at the study institutions with interpreters readily available found it easier to “get by” without an interpreter, despite misgivings about negative implications for quality of care. Findings suggest that increasing interpreter use will require interventions targeted at both individual physicians and the practice environment.

Shared Decision Making and the Experience of Partnership in Primary Care

PURPOSE Communication has been researched either as a set of behaviors or as a facet of the patient-physician relationship, often leading to conflicting results. To determine the relationship between these perspectives, we examined shared decision making (SDM) and the subjective experience of partnership for patients and physicians in primary care. METHODS From a convenience sample of experienced primary care physicians in 3 clinics, we recruited a stratified sample of 18 English- or Spanish-speaking patients. Direct observation of visits was followed by videotape-triggered stimulated recall sessions with patients and physicians. We coded decision moments for objective evidence of SDM, using a structured instrument. We classified patients’ and physicians’ subjective experience of partnership as positive or negative by a consensus analysis of stimulated recall sessions. We combined results from these 2 analyses to generate 4 archetypes of engagements and used grounded theory to identify themes associated with each archetype. RESULTS The 18 visits yielded 125 decisions, 62 (50%) of which demonstrated SDM. Eighty-two decisions were discussed in stimulated recall and available for combined analysis, resulting in 4 archetypes of engagement in decision making: full engagement (SDM present, subjective experience positive)—22%; simulated engagement (SDM present, subjective experience negative)—38%; assumed engagement (SDM absent, subjective experience positive)—21%; and nonengagement (SDM absent, subjective experience negative)—19%. Thematic analysis revealed that both relationship factors (eg, trust, power) and communication behavior influenced subjective experience of partnership. CONCLUSIONS Combining direct observation and assessment of the subjective experience of partnership suggests that communication behavior does not ensure an experience of collaboration, and a positive subjective experience of partnership does not reflect full communication. Attempts to enhance patient-physician partnership must attend to both effective communication style and affective relationship dynamics.

Interventions to improve patient comprehension in informed consent for medical and surgical procedures: a systematic review

Background. Patient understanding in clinical informed consent is often poor. Little is known about the effectiveness of interventions to improve comprehension or the extent to which such interventions address different elements of understanding in informed consent. Purpose. To systematically review communication interventions to improve patient comprehension in informed consent for medical and surgical procedures. Data Sources. A systematic literature search of English-language articles in MEDLINE (1949–2008) and EMBASE (1974–2008) was performed. In addition, a published bibliography of empirical research on informed consent and the reference lists of all eligible studies were reviewed. Study Selection. Randomized controlled trials and controlled trials with nonrandom allocation were included if they compared comprehension in informed consent for a medical or surgical procedure. Only studies that used a quantitative, objective measure of understanding were included. All studies addressed informed consent for a needed or recommended procedure in actual patients. Data Extraction. Reviewers independently extracted data using a standardized form. All results were compared, and disagreements were resolved by consensus. Data Synthesis. Forty-four studies were eligible. Intervention categories included written information, audiovisual/multimedia, extended discussions, and test/feedback techniques. The majority of studies assessed patient understanding of procedural risks; other elements included benefits, alternatives, and general knowledge about the procedure. Only 6 of 44 studies assessed all 4 elements of understanding. Interventions were generally effective in improving patient comprehension, especially regarding risks and general knowledge. Limitations. Many studies failed to include adequate description of the study population, and outcome measures varied widely. Conclusions. A wide range of communication interventions improve comprehension in clinical informed consent. Decisions to enhance informed consent should consider the importance of different elements of understanding, beyond procedural risks, as well as feasibility and acceptability of the intervention to clinicians and patients. Conceptual clarity regarding the key elements of informed consent knowledge will help to focus improvements and standardize evaluations.

Food Insecurity and Glycemic Control Among Low-Income Patients With Type 2 Diabetes

OBJECTIVE To determine whether food insecurity—the inability to reliably afford safe and nutritious food—is associated with poor glycemic control and whether this association is mediated by difficulty following a healthy diet, diabetes self-efficacy, or emotional distress related to diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We used multivariable regression models to examine the association between food insecurity and poor glycemic control using a cross-sectional survey and chart review of 711 patients with diabetes in safety net health clinics. We then examined whether difficulty following a diabetic diet, self-efficacy, or emotional distress related to diabetes mediated the relationship between food insecurity and glycemic control. RESULTS The food insecurity prevalence in our sample was 46%. Food-insecure participants were significantly more likely than food-secure participants to have poor glycemic control, as defined by hemoglobin A1c ≥8.5% (42 vs. 33%; adjusted odds ratio 1.48 [95% CI 1.07–2.04]). Food-insecure participants were more likely to report difficulty affording a diabetic diet (64 vs. 49%, P < 0.001). They also reported lower diabetes-specific self-efficacy (P < 0.001) and higher emotional distress related to diabetes (P < 0.001). Difficulty following a healthy diet and emotional distress partially mediated the association between food insecurity and glycemic control. CONCLUSIONS Food insecurity is an independent risk factor for poor glycemic control in the safety net setting. This risk may be partially attributable to increased difficulty following a diabetes-appropriate diet and increased emotional distress regarding capacity for successful diabetes self-management. Screening patients with diabetes for food insecurity may be appropriate, particularly in the safety net setting.

Language Barriers, Physician-Patient Language Concordance, and Glycemic Control Among Insured Latinos with Diabetes: The Diabetes Study of Northern California (DISTANCE)

ABSTRACTBACKGROUNDA significant proportion of US Latinos with diabetes have limited English proficiency (LEP). Whether language barriers in health care contribute to poor glycemic control is unknown.OBJECTIVETo assess the association between limited English proficiency (LEP) and glycemic control and whether this association is modified by having a language-concordant physician.DESIGNCross-sectional, observational study using data from the 2005–2006 Diabetes Study of Northern California (DISTANCE). Patients received care in a managed care setting with interpreter services and self-reported their English language ability and the Spanish language ability of their physician. Outcome was poor glycemic control (glycosylated hemoglobin A1c > 9%).KEY RESULTSThe unadjusted percentage of patients with poor glycemic control was similar among Latino patients with LEP (n = 510) and Latino English-speakers (n = 2,683), and higher in both groups than in whites (n = 3,545) (21% vs 18% vs. 10%, p < 0.005). This relationship differed significantly by patient-provider language concordance (p < 0.01 for interaction). LEP patients with language-discordant physicians (n = 115) were more likely than LEP patients with language-concordant physicians (n = 137) to have poor glycemic control (27.8% vs 16.1% p = 0.02). After controlling for potential demographic and clinical confounders, LEP Latinos with language-concordant physicians had similar odds of poor glycemic control as Latino English speakers (OR 0.89; CI 0.53–1.49), whereas LEP Latinos with language-discordant physicians had greater odds of poor control than Latino English speakers (OR 1.76; CI 1.04–2.97). Among LEP Latinos, having a language discordant physician was associated with significantly poorer glycemic control (OR 1.98; CI 1.03–3.80).CONCLUSIONSLanguage barriers contribute to health disparities among Latinos with diabetes. Limited English proficiency is an independent predictor for poor glycemic control among insured US Latinos with diabetes, an association not observed when care is provided by language-concordant physicians. Future research should determine if strategies to increase language-concordant care improve glycemic control among US Latinos with LEP.

The Impact of Language Barriers on Documentation of Informed Consent at a Hospital with On-Site Interpreter Services

BACKGROUNDInformed consent is legally and ethically required before invasive non-emergent procedures. Language barriers make obtaining informed consent more complex.OBJECTIVEDetermine the impact of language barriers on documentation of informed consent among patients in a teaching hospital with on-site interpreter services.DESIGNMatched retrospective chart review study.SUBJECTSEligible Chinese- and Spanish-speaking patients with limited English proficiency (LEP) who received a thoracentesis, paracentesis, or lumbar puncture were matched with eligible English-speaking patients by procedure, hospital service, and date of procedure.MEASUREMENTSCharts were reviewed for documentation of informed consent (IC), including a procedure note documenting an IC discussion and a signed consent form. For LEP patients, full documentation of informed consent also included evidence of interpretation, or a consent form in the patient’s primary language.RESULTSSeventy-four procedures in LEP patients were matched with 74 procedures in English speakers. Charts of English-speaking patients were more likely than those of LEP patients to contain full documentation of informed consent (53% vs 28%; odds ratio (OR): 2.81; 95% CI, 1.42–5.56; p = 0.003). Upon multivariate analysis adjusting for patient and service factors, English speakers remained more likely than LEP patients to have full documentation of informed consent (Adj OR: 3.10; 95% CI, 1.49–6.47; p = 0.003). When examining the components of informed consent, charts of English-speaking and LEP patients were similar in the proportion documenting a consent discussion; however, charts of English speakers were more likely to contain a signed consent form in any language (85% vs 70%, p = 0.03).CONCLUSIONSDespite the availability of on-site professional interpreter services, hospitalized patients who do not speak English are less likely to have documentation of informed consent for common invasive procedures. Hospital quality initiatives should consider monitoring informed consent for LEP patients.

The impact of limited English proficiency and physician language concordance on reports of clinical interactions among patients with diabetes: The DISTANCE study

OBJECTIVE To assess the association of limited English proficiency (LEP) and physician language concordance with patient reports of clinical interactions. METHODS 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. RESULTS 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. CONCLUSIONS Reports of suboptimal interactions among patients with LEP were more common among those with language-discordant physicians. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS Expanding access to language concordant physicians may improve clinical interactions among patients with LEP. Quality and performance assessments should consider physician-patient language concordance.

Food Insecurity and Hypoglycemia Among Safety Net Patients With Diabetes

In 2008, 1 in every 7 US households was food insecure, or at risk of going hungry because of an inability to afford food.(1) Food insecurity generally occurs cyclically and episodically, with periods of food adequacy followed by food scarcity; the average food insecure household experiences seven episodes of food scarcity annually.(2) We hypothesized that the cyclic nature of food insecurity, and its associated fluctuations in dietary intake, would predispose patients with diabetes to wide variations in blood glucose levels, including clinically significant hypoglycemia.