OBJECTIVE: There is a growing demand for interpreters in the cancer setting. Interpreters, the link to quality care for limited English proficiency patients, face many psychosocial stressors in their work. This project assessed interpreters' experiences of stress and piloted a resiliency program to help interpreters cope with stressors. METHODS: From 2013 to 2014, we pilot tested a targeted resiliency program with interpreters from three Boston-based hospitals. In Phase 1, we conducted five focus groups (n = 31) to identify interpreters' psychosocial needs. In Phase 2, we developed and tested a 4-h group program with 29 interpreters (response rate = 90%; 69% female, 54% Hispanic, 85% born outside of the U.S.). RESULTS: Phase 1. Stressors were patient-based (seeing young patients decline), interactions with medical team (unsure of role), and systems-based (appointment unpredictability). Phase 2. At baseline interpreters reported low abilities to cope with stress (measured by the Measure of Current Status (MOCS-A)). At 4-week follow-up we found improvements in job satisfaction (p = .02; Cohen's d = .41) and declines in sick days (p = .08; Cohen's d = .38). Stress reactivity (MOCS-A) improved; specifically participants reported feeling more assertive about their needs (p = .10; Cohen's d = .30) and more able to relax at will (p = .10; Cohen's d = .35)-important mechanisms to lower distress. CONCLUSIONS: We piloted a resiliency program for medical interpreters in cancer care. We found that interpreters experience distress and have low coping skills. This program resulted in improved work factors and stress reactivity. Future research should include further implementation and testing in a larger, randomized trial.
OBJECTIVE: There is a growing demand for interpreters in the cancer setting. Interpreters, the link to quality care for limited English proficiency patients, face many psychosocial stressors in their work. This project assessed interpreters' experiences of stress and piloted a resiliency program to help interpreters cope with stressors. METHODS: From 2013 to 2014, we pilot tested a targeted resiliency program with interpreters from three Boston-based hospitals. In Phase 1, we conducted five focus groups (n = 31) to identify interpreters' psychosocial needs. In Phase 2, we developed and tested a 4-h group program with 29 interpreters (response rate = 90%; 69% female, 54% Hispanic, 85% born outside of the U.S.). RESULTS: Phase 1. Stressors were patient-based (seeing young patients decline), interactions with medical team (unsure of role), and systems-based (appointment unpredictability). Phase 2. At baseline interpreters reported low abilities to cope with stress (measured by the Measure of Current Status (MOCS-A)). At 4-week follow-up we found improvements in job satisfaction (p = .02; Cohen's d = .41) and declines in sick days (p = .08; Cohen's d = .38). Stress reactivity (MOCS-A) improved; specifically participants reported feeling more assertive about their needs (p = .10; Cohen's d = .30) and more able to relax at will (p = .10; Cohen's d = .35)-important mechanisms to lower distress. CONCLUSIONS: We piloted a resiliency program for medical interpreters in cancer care. We found that interpreters experience distress and have low coping skills. This program resulted in improved work factors and stress reactivity. Future research should include further implementation and testing in a larger, randomized trial.
Authors: John Z Ayanian; Alan M Zaslavsky; Edward Guadagnoli; Charles S Fuchs; Kathleen J Yost; Cynthia M Creech; Rosemary D Cress; Lilia C O'Connor; Dee W West; William E Wright Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-08-22 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Lara Traeger; Elyse R Park; Nora Sporn; Jennifer Repper-DeLisi; Mary Susan Convery; Michelle Jacobo; William F Pirl Journal: Oncol Nurs Forum Date: 2013-07 Impact factor: 2.172
Authors: Giang T Nguyen; Nicholas P Shungu; Jeff Niederdeppe; Frances K Barg; John H Holmes; Katrina Armstrong; Robert C Hornik Journal: J Health Commun Date: 2010-10
Authors: Karen Donelan; Karin Hobrecker; Lidia Schapira; Johanna R Mailhot; Bernardo H Goulart; Bruce A Chabner Journal: Cancer Date: 2009-07-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: M R DiMatteo; C D Sherbourne; R D Hays; L Ordway; R L Kravitz; E A McGlynn; S Kaplan; W H Rogers Journal: Health Psychol Date: 1993-03 Impact factor: 4.267
Authors: Zeina Chemali; Christina P C Borba; Kelsey Johnson; Rebecca S Hock; Lindsey Parnarouskis; David C Henderson; Gregory L Fricchione Journal: Med Confl Surviv Date: 2017-05-12
Authors: Karen A Kuhlthau; Christina M Luberto; Lara Traeger; Rachel A Millstein; Giselle K Perez; Olivia J Lindly; Emma Chad-Friedman; Jacqueline Proszynski; Elyse R Park Journal: J Autism Dev Disord Date: 2020-07
Authors: Elyse R Park; Christina M Luberto; Emma Chad-Friedman; Lara Traeger; Daniel L Hall; Giselle K Perez; Brett Goshe; Ana-Maria Vranceanu; Margaret Baim; John W Denninger Md PhD; Gregory Fricchione Md; Herbert Benson Md; Suzanne C Lechner Journal: Glob Adv Health Med Date: 2021-03-24
Authors: Elyse R Park; Giselle K Perez; Rachel A Millstein; Christina M Luberto; Lara Traeger; Jacqueline Proszynski; Emma Chad-Friedman; Karen A Kuhlthau Journal: Matern Child Health J Date: 2020-01
Authors: Rachel A Millstein; Olivia J Lindly; Christina M Luberto; Giselle K Perez; Gabrielle N Schwartz; Karen Kuhlthau; Elyse R Park Journal: J Dev Behav Pediatr Date: 2020-08 Impact factor: 2.988