BACKGROUND: Federal law obligates health care providers receiving federal funding to ensure language access to limited English-proficient (LEP) individuals who cannot communicate with their provider. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether LEP individual awareness of this law improved language access through interpreter utilization. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In June 2003, a telephone survey of 1,200 Californians was conducted in 11 non-English languages. MEASUREMENTS: The survey included items on English proficiency, awareness of language law, health care utilization, and communication methods. Language access was defined as having a provider who speaks the individual's language (language-concordant) or utilizing an interpreter. RESULTS: There were 1,000 LEP participants, of whom 371 (37%) were aware of the language law. Four hundred and ninety-one (49%) of LEP participants had a language-concordant provider. Of the remaining 509 LEP participants without a language-concordant provider, 111 (22%) reported interpreter utilization in the health care setting. After controlling for age, gender, education, income, insurance status, years in the United States, health care utilization, and level of English proficiency, awareness of law was not associated with interpreter utilization (odds ratio [OR] 0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.38, 1.17; P=.16), but was associated with having a language-concordant provider (OR 1.64; 95% CI 1.19, 2.26; P=.003). CONCLUSION: Awareness of language law is not sufficient to resolve language barriers for LEP individuals. Provider and organization level barriers to language access must be addressed.
BACKGROUND: Federal law obligates health care providers receiving federal funding to ensure language access to limited English-proficient (LEP) individuals who cannot communicate with their provider. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether LEP individual awareness of this law improved language access through interpreter utilization. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In June 2003, a telephone survey of 1,200 Californians was conducted in 11 non-English languages. MEASUREMENTS: The survey included items on English proficiency, awareness of language law, health care utilization, and communication methods. Language access was defined as having a provider who speaks the individual's language (language-concordant) or utilizing an interpreter. RESULTS: There were 1,000 LEP participants, of whom 371 (37%) were aware of the language law. Four hundred and ninety-one (49%) of LEP participants had a language-concordant provider. Of the remaining 509 LEP participants without a language-concordant provider, 111 (22%) reported interpreter utilization in the health care setting. After controlling for age, gender, education, income, insurance status, years in the United States, health care utilization, and level of English proficiency, awareness of law was not associated with interpreter utilization (odds ratio [OR] 0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.38, 1.17; P=.16), but was associated with having a language-concordant provider (OR 1.64; 95% CI 1.19, 2.26; P=.003). CONCLUSION: Awareness of language law is not sufficient to resolve language barriers for LEP individuals. Provider and organization level barriers to language access must be addressed.
Authors: Urmimala Sarkar; John D Piette; Ralph Gonzales; Daniel Lessler; Lisa D Chew; Brendan Reilly; Jolene Johnson; Melanie Brunt; Jennifer Huang; Marsha Regenstein; Dean Schillinger Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2007-11-07
Authors: Desiree Lie; John Boker; Sylvia Bereknyei; Susan Ahearn; Charlotte Fesko; Patricia Lenahan Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2007-11 Impact factor: 5.128