OBJECTIVE: We investigated 9-1-1 telecommunicators' perceptions of communication difficulties with callers who have limited English proficiency (LEP) and the frequency and outcomes of specific communication behaviors. METHODS: A survey was administered to 150 telecommunicators from four 9-1-1 call centers of a metropolitan area in the Pacific Northwest to assess their experience working with LEP callers. In addition, 172 9-1-1 recordings (86 of which were labeled by telecommunicators as having a "language barrier") were abstracted for telecommunicators' communication behaviors and care delivery outcomes. All recordings were for patients who were in presumed cardiac arrest (patient unconscious and not breathing). Additionally, computer-assisted dispatch (CAD) reports were abstracted to assess dispatch practices with regard to timing of basic life support (BLS) and advanced life support (ALS) dispatch. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-three of the telecommunicators (82%) filled out the survey. The majority (70%) reported that they encounter LEP callers almost daily and most (78%) of them reported that communication difficulties affect the medical care these callers receive. Additionally, the telecommunicators reported that calls with LEP callers are often (36%) stressful. The number one strategy for communication with LEP callers reported by telecommunicators was the use of a telephone interpreter line known as the Language Line. However, the Language Line was utilized in only 13% of LEP calls abstracted for this study. The analysis of 9-1-1 recordings suggests that the LEP callers received more repetition, rephrasing, and slowing of speech than the non-LEP callers. Although there was no difference in time from onset of call to dispatching BLS, there was a significant difference in simultaneous dispatching of BLS and ALS between the LEP calls (20%) and non-LEP calls (38%, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our study shows that 9-1-1 telecommunicators believe language barriers with LEP callers negatively impact communication and care outcomes. More research needs to be conducted on "best practices" for phone-based emergency communication with LEP callers. Additionally, LEP communities need to better understand the 9-1-1 system and how to effectively communicate during emergencies.
OBJECTIVE: We investigated 9-1-1 telecommunicators' perceptions of communication difficulties with callers who have limited English proficiency (LEP) and the frequency and outcomes of specific communication behaviors. METHODS: A survey was administered to 150 telecommunicators from four 9-1-1 call centers of a metropolitan area in the Pacific Northwest to assess their experience working with LEP callers. In addition, 172 9-1-1 recordings (86 of which were labeled by telecommunicators as having a "language barrier") were abstracted for telecommunicators' communication behaviors and care delivery outcomes. All recordings were for patients who were in presumed cardiac arrest (patient unconscious and not breathing). Additionally, computer-assisted dispatch (CAD) reports were abstracted to assess dispatch practices with regard to timing of basic life support (BLS) and advanced life support (ALS) dispatch. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-three of the telecommunicators (82%) filled out the survey. The majority (70%) reported that they encounter LEP callers almost daily and most (78%) of them reported that communication difficulties affect the medical care these callers receive. Additionally, the telecommunicators reported that calls with LEP callers are often (36%) stressful. The number one strategy for communication with LEP callers reported by telecommunicators was the use of a telephone interpreter line known as the Language Line. However, the Language Line was utilized in only 13% of LEP calls abstracted for this study. The analysis of 9-1-1 recordings suggests that the LEP callers received more repetition, rephrasing, and slowing of speech than the non-LEP callers. Although there was no difference in time from onset of call to dispatching BLS, there was a significant difference in simultaneous dispatching of BLS and ALS between the LEP calls (20%) and non-LEP calls (38%, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our study shows that 9-1-1 telecommunicators believe language barriers with LEP callers negatively impact communication and care outcomes. More research needs to be conducted on "best practices" for phone-based emergency communication with LEP callers. Additionally, LEP communities need to better understand the 9-1-1 system and how to effectively communicate during emergencies.
Authors: Hendrika Meischke; Brooke Ike; Ian Painter; Devora Chavez; Mei Po Yip; Steven M Bradley; Shin-Ping Tu Journal: J Immigr Minor Health Date: 2015-08
Authors: Eun Ji Kim; Taekyu Kim; Michael K Paasche-Orlow; Adam J Rose; Amresh D Hanchate Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2017-02-03 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Comilla Sasson; Jason S Haukoos; Leila Ben-Youssef; Lorenzo Ramirez; Sheana Bull; Brian Eigel; David J Magid; Ricardo Padilla Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2014-12-03 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: Philip Weng Kee Leong; Benjamin Sieu-Hon Leong; Shalini Arulanandam; Marie Xin Ru Ng; Yih Yng Ng; Marcus Eng Hock Ong; Desmond Ren Hao Mao Journal: Singapore Med J Date: 2020-05-27 Impact factor: 1.858
Authors: Kathryn M Stadeli; Dirir Abdullahi; Abdifatah Ali; Kelsey M Conrick; Maria Paulsen; Eileen M Bulger; Monica S Vavilala; Farah Bille Mohamed; Ahmed Ali; Anisa Ibrahim Journal: Am J Surg Date: 2020-03-10 Impact factor: 2.565