Early use of professional interpreters improves trauma outcomes: Results of a single-center retrospective study

IF 1.4 Q3 SURGERY
Sydney C. Bertram , F. Riley Nichols , Lauren E. Cox , Deepak K. Ozhathil , Mike M. Mallah
{"title":"Early use of professional interpreters improves trauma outcomes: Results of a single-center retrospective study","authors":"Sydney C. Bertram ,&nbsp;F. Riley Nichols ,&nbsp;Lauren E. Cox ,&nbsp;Deepak K. Ozhathil ,&nbsp;Mike M. Mallah","doi":"10.1016/j.sopen.2024.09.006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Patients with limited English proficiency (LEP) experience reduced pain assessment and treatment, less comprehensive physical exams, and fewer explanations of the next steps in care. These disparities persist in hospitals with staffed professional interpreters, raising questions about interpreter access and the impact on outcomes. A retrospective review of 1133 trauma activations at a single center Level 1 Trauma Center in 2021–2022 was conducted. Demographic, injury, and outcome data were drawn from the institutional trauma registry, and patient-preferred language was pulled from EMR data. Early interpreter use was defined as documentation of professional interpreter use within 24 h of arrival. LOS and ICU LOS were compared between language groups using Cox regression, and mortality was compared using Fischer's exact test. 1114 patients had data available on initial injury severity and preferred language. Of the 70 LEP patients, 62 (88.6 %) required an interpreter, and 41 of those (66.1 %) had evidence of professional interpreter use within 24 h of arrival. LEP patients who lacked early interpreter use had longer hospital stays than both English proficient (EP) patients (HR 0.59, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.05) and LEP patients with early interpreter use (HR 0.51, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.05) when stratified by ISS and controlling for GCS and patient age. There is no difference in LOS between LEP trauma patients who used an interpreter and EP patients, suggesting that early use of an interpreter may improve the length of stay in LEP trauma patients.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":74892,"journal":{"name":"Surgery open science","volume":"21 ","pages":"Pages 52-57"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgery open science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589845024001192","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Patients with limited English proficiency (LEP) experience reduced pain assessment and treatment, less comprehensive physical exams, and fewer explanations of the next steps in care. These disparities persist in hospitals with staffed professional interpreters, raising questions about interpreter access and the impact on outcomes. A retrospective review of 1133 trauma activations at a single center Level 1 Trauma Center in 2021–2022 was conducted. Demographic, injury, and outcome data were drawn from the institutional trauma registry, and patient-preferred language was pulled from EMR data. Early interpreter use was defined as documentation of professional interpreter use within 24 h of arrival. LOS and ICU LOS were compared between language groups using Cox regression, and mortality was compared using Fischer's exact test. 1114 patients had data available on initial injury severity and preferred language. Of the 70 LEP patients, 62 (88.6 %) required an interpreter, and 41 of those (66.1 %) had evidence of professional interpreter use within 24 h of arrival. LEP patients who lacked early interpreter use had longer hospital stays than both English proficient (EP) patients (HR 0.59, p < 0.05) and LEP patients with early interpreter use (HR 0.51, p < 0.05) when stratified by ISS and controlling for GCS and patient age. There is no difference in LOS between LEP trauma patients who used an interpreter and EP patients, suggesting that early use of an interpreter may improve the length of stay in LEP trauma patients.

Abstract Image

尽早使用专业口译人员可改善创伤治疗效果:单中心回顾性研究结果
英语水平有限(LEP)的患者在疼痛评估和治疗方面的经历较少,体检不够全面,对下一步护理措施的解释也较少。在配备了专业口译人员的医院中,这些不平等现象依然存在,从而引发了有关口译人员使用权及其对治疗效果影响的问题。我们对 2021-2022 年间在一家一级重创中心启动的 1133 例重创病例进行了回顾性研究。人口统计学、损伤和预后数据来自于机构创伤登记处,患者首选语言来自于 EMR 数据。早期使用口译员的定义是,在抵达后 24 小时内使用专业口译员的记录。使用 Cox 回归比较了不同语言组的住院时间和重症监护室住院时间,并使用费舍尔精确检验比较了死亡率。有 1114 名患者提供了最初受伤严重程度和首选语言的数据。在 70 名 LEP 患者中,62 人(88.6%)需要翻译,其中 41 人(66.1%)有证据表明在到达医院 24 小时内使用过专业翻译。与英语熟练(EP)患者(HR 0.59,p < 0.05)和早期使用口译员的 LEP 患者(HR 0.51,p < 0.05)相比,没有早期使用口译员的 LEP 患者的住院时间更长,如果按 ISS 分层并控制 GCS 和患者年龄的话。使用口译员的 LEP 创伤患者与 EP 患者的住院时间没有差异,这表明尽早使用口译员可能会缩短 LEP 创伤患者的住院时间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
66 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信