Prevalence of Professional Interpreter Use in Emergency Departments: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q1 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Henry Li, Ana Ramirez, Lisa Hartling, Jaspreet Khangura, Liz Dennett, Victor Do, Kayathiri Ganeshamoorthy, Samina Ali
{"title":"Prevalence of Professional Interpreter Use in Emergency Departments: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Henry Li, Ana Ramirez, Lisa Hartling, Jaspreet Khangura, Liz Dennett, Victor Do, Kayathiri Ganeshamoorthy, Samina Ali","doi":"10.1111/acem.70427","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Emergency departments (EDs) increasingly serve linguistically diverse populations. Professional interpretation improves care, yet its use remains variable. Quantifying the prevalence of use and understanding disparities can inform policies and interventions. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the prevalence of professional interpreter use in English-speaking EDs and compare use across patient populations and countries.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Eight databases were searched from inception to May 15, 2025. We screened full texts included in a prior scoping review to identify studies reporting the prevalence of professional interpreter use among patients requiring interpretation in English-speaking EDs. We pooled prevalence overall and stratified by population (adult vs. children) and country (United States vs. other), with 95% prediction intervals and confidence intervals (CIs). Meta-regression assessed associations between study year and prevalence. Risk of bias was evaluated using the JBI checklist for prevalence studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-two studies spanning 1997-2025 involving 65,736 participants were included. Professional interpreters were used in 29% (CI, 20%, 38%) of encounters with patients requiring interpretation. Use was higher with children (49%; CI, 41%, 58%) than adults (16%; CI, 11%, 22%), and higher in the United States (33%; CI, 24%, 43%) than other countries (14%; CI, 4%, 30%). There was no significant association between study year and interpreter use (p = 0.38).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Despite known benefits, professional interpreter use in EDs remains low, particularly among adults and outside the United States. Addressing this gap will require coordinated efforts from clinicians, health system leaders, and policymakers to improve access to and accountability for language-concordant care in EDs.</p>","PeriodicalId":7105,"journal":{"name":"Academic Emergency Medicine","volume":"33 10","pages":"e70427"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13664663/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Academic Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/acem.70427","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Emergency departments (EDs) increasingly serve linguistically diverse populations. Professional interpretation improves care, yet its use remains variable. Quantifying the prevalence of use and understanding disparities can inform policies and interventions. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the prevalence of professional interpreter use in English-speaking EDs and compare use across patient populations and countries.

Methods: Eight databases were searched from inception to May 15, 2025. We screened full texts included in a prior scoping review to identify studies reporting the prevalence of professional interpreter use among patients requiring interpretation in English-speaking EDs. We pooled prevalence overall and stratified by population (adult vs. children) and country (United States vs. other), with 95% prediction intervals and confidence intervals (CIs). Meta-regression assessed associations between study year and prevalence. Risk of bias was evaluated using the JBI checklist for prevalence studies.

Results: Thirty-two studies spanning 1997-2025 involving 65,736 participants were included. Professional interpreters were used in 29% (CI, 20%, 38%) of encounters with patients requiring interpretation. Use was higher with children (49%; CI, 41%, 58%) than adults (16%; CI, 11%, 22%), and higher in the United States (33%; CI, 24%, 43%) than other countries (14%; CI, 4%, 30%). There was no significant association between study year and interpreter use (p = 0.38).

Conclusions: Despite known benefits, professional interpreter use in EDs remains low, particularly among adults and outside the United States. Addressing this gap will require coordinated efforts from clinicians, health system leaders, and policymakers to improve access to and accountability for language-concordant care in EDs.

急诊科专业口译使用的普遍性:一项系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景:急诊科(EDs)越来越多地服务于语言多样化的人群。专业的口译提高了护理水平,但其使用仍然存在变数。量化使用的普遍程度和了解差异可以为政策和干预提供信息。我们进行了一项系统回顾和荟萃分析,以估计专业口译员在英语急诊科的使用情况,并比较不同患者群体和国家的使用情况。方法:检索自建库至2025年5月15日的8个数据库。我们筛选了先前范围综述中的全文,以确定报告在英语急诊科需要口译的患者中使用专业口译员的流行程度的研究。我们汇总了总体患病率,并按人群(成人与儿童)和国家(美国与其他国家)分层,预测区间和置信区间(ci)为95%。meta回归评估了研究年份与患病率之间的关系。使用流行病学研究的JBI检查表评估偏倚风险。结果:32项研究跨越1997-2025年,涉及65,736名参与者。29% (CI, 20%, 38%)需要口译的患者使用专业口译员。儿童的使用率(49%;CI, 41%, 58%)高于成人(16%;CI, 11%, 22%),美国(33%;CI, 24%, 43%)高于其他国家(14%;CI, 4%, 30%)。学习年限与口译员使用之间无显著相关性(p = 0.38)。结论:尽管有已知的好处,专业口译员在急诊科的使用率仍然很低,特别是在成年人和美国以外的地区。解决这一差距需要临床医生、卫生系统领导人和政策制定者的协调努力,以改善急诊科语言一致护理的可及性和问责制。
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
Academic Emergency Medicine
Academic Emergency Medicine 医学-急救医学
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
6.80%
发文量
207
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Academic Emergency Medicine (AEM) is the official monthly publication of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM) and publishes information relevant to the practice, educational advancements, and investigation of emergency medicine. It is the second-largest peer-reviewed scientific journal in the specialty of emergency medicine. The goal of AEM is to advance the science, education, and clinical practice of emergency medicine, to serve as a voice for the academic emergency medicine community, and to promote SAEM''s goals and objectives. Members and non-members worldwide depend on this journal for translational medicine relevant to emergency medicine, as well as for clinical news, case studies and more. Each issue contains information relevant to the research, educational advancements, and practice in emergency medicine. Subject matter is diverse, including preclinical studies, clinical topics, health policy, and educational methods. The research of SAEM members contributes significantly to the scientific content and development of the journal.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书