Sydney C. Bertram , F. Riley Nichols , Lauren E. Cox , Deepak K. Ozhathil , Mike M. Mallah
{"title":"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","authors":"Sydney C. Bertram , F. Riley Nichols , Lauren E. Cox , Deepak K. Ozhathil , 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> < 0.05) and LEP patients with early interpreter use (HR 0.51, <em>p</em> < 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":"{\"title\":\"Early use of professional interpreters improves trauma outcomes: Results of a single-center retrospective study\",\"authors\":\"Sydney C. Bertram , F. Riley Nichols , Lauren E. Cox , Deepak K. Ozhathil , 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> < 0.05) and LEP patients with early interpreter use (HR 0.51, <em>p</em> < 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}","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}
Early use of professional interpreters improves trauma outcomes: Results of a single-center retrospective study
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.