David S Edelman1, Dana M Palmer2, Emily K Romero3, Bernard P Chang4, Ian M Kronish5. 1. Primary Care/Social Internal Medicine Residency Program, Department of Medicine, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY, USA. 2. Department of Epidemiology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA. 3. Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA. 4. Department of Emergency Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA. 5. Center for Behavioral Cardiovascular Health, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, 622 West 168th Street, PH9-311, New York, NY, 10032, USA. ik2293@cumc.columbia.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: High-quality interpersonal interactions between clinicians and patients can improve communication and reduce health disparities among patients with novice English proficiency (NEP). Yet, little is known about the impact of native language, NEP, and native language concordance on patient on perceptions of interpersonal care in the emergency department (ED). OBJECTIVE: To determine the associations of native language, NEP, and native language concordance with patient perceptions of interpersonal care among patients undergoing evaluation for suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in the ED. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This prospective cohort study included 1000 patients undergoing evaluation for suspected ACS at an urban ED from 2013 to 2016. MAIN MEASURES: English- and Spanish-speaking patients were surveyed to identify native language, English proficiency (classified as advanced, intermediate, or novice), and perceived language of the treating ED clinician. Patient perceptions of interpersonal care were assessed using the Interpersonal Processes of Care (IPC) survey, a validated 18-item tool for assessing social-psychological domains of patient-clinician interactions. IPC scores ≤ 4 were categorized as sub-optimal (range, 1-5). The associations between native language, English proficiency, and native language concordance with sub-optimal communication were assessed using hierarchical logistic regression adjusted for all three language variables, sociodemographic characteristics, and depression. KEY RESULTS: Nine hundred thirty-three patients (48.0% native non-English-speaking, 55.7% Hispanic) completed the IPC; 522 (57.4%) perceived native language concordance. In unadjusted analyses, non-English native language (OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.04-1.82) and NEP (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.06-1.98) were associated with sub-optimal communication, whereas language concordance was protective (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.46-0.81). In fully adjusted analyses, only language concordance remained significantly associated with sub-optimal communication (AOR 0.62, 95% CI 0.42-0.93). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that perceived native language concordance acts as a protective factor for patient-clinician interpersonal care in the acute setting, regardless of native language or English proficiency.
BACKGROUND: High-quality interpersonal interactions between clinicians and patients can improve communication and reduce health disparities among patients with novice English proficiency (NEP). Yet, little is known about the impact of native language, NEP, and native language concordance on patient on perceptions of interpersonal care in the emergency department (ED). OBJECTIVE: To determine the associations of native language, NEP, and native language concordance with patient perceptions of interpersonal care among patients undergoing evaluation for suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in the ED. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This prospective cohort study included 1000 patients undergoing evaluation for suspected ACS at an urban ED from 2013 to 2016. MAIN MEASURES: English- and Spanish-speaking patients were surveyed to identify native language, English proficiency (classified as advanced, intermediate, or novice), and perceived language of the treating ED clinician. Patient perceptions of interpersonal care were assessed using the Interpersonal Processes of Care (IPC) survey, a validated 18-item tool for assessing social-psychological domains of patient-clinician interactions. IPC scores ≤ 4 were categorized as sub-optimal (range, 1-5). The associations between native language, English proficiency, and native language concordance with sub-optimal communication were assessed using hierarchical logistic regression adjusted for all three language variables, sociodemographic characteristics, and depression. KEY RESULTS: Nine hundred thirty-three patients (48.0% native non-English-speaking, 55.7% Hispanic) completed the IPC; 522 (57.4%) perceived native language concordance. In unadjusted analyses, non-English native language (OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.04-1.82) and NEP (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.06-1.98) were associated with sub-optimal communication, whereas language concordance was protective (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.46-0.81). In fully adjusted analyses, only language concordance remained significantly associated with sub-optimal communication (AOR 0.62, 95% CI 0.42-0.93). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that perceived native language concordance acts as a protective factor for patient-clinician interpersonal care in the acute setting, regardless of native language or English proficiency.
Authors: Jay M Brenner; Eileen F Baker; Kenneth V Iserson; Nicholas H Kluesner; Kenneth D Marshall; Laura Vearrier Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2018-07-04 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: Alissa Detz; Carol M Mangione; Fatima Nunez de Jaimes; Christine Noguera; Leo S Morales; Chi-Hong Tseng; Gerardo Moreno Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2014-09-03 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Bernard P Chang; Jennifer A Sumner; Myrta Haerizadeh; Eileen Carter; Donald Edmondson Journal: Emerg Med J Date: 2016-04-28 Impact factor: 2.740
Authors: Yu-Feng Chan; Kumar Alagappan; Joseph Rella; Suzanne Bentley; Marie Soto-Greene; Marcus Martin Journal: J Emerg Med Date: 2008-06-20 Impact factor: 1.484
Authors: Quyen Ngo-Metzger; Dara H Sorkin; Russell S Phillips; Sheldon Greenfield; Michael P Massagli; Brian Clarridge; Sherrie H Kaplan Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2007-11 Impact factor: 5.128