Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 16, 2025

Systematic Hearing Performance Evaluation Process for Adolescents with Cochlear Implantation at Early Ages
Published on: March 24, 2023
Is video interpretation compromising care for the hearing loss population?
Julianna Mastropierro1, Ritwik Sanyal1, Alyssa Heiser2
1Tufts University School of Medicine, 145 Harrison Ave, Boston, MA 02111, USA; Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Tufts Medical Center, 860 Washington St, Boston, MA 02111, USA.
Objective:
The convergence of hearing impairment and language barriers presents unique communication challenges to patients and practicing otolaryngologists. Limited data exist comparing interpretation methods for patients with hearing loss. Patients with hearing loss rely on visual cues, lip-reading, written communication, and/or comprehensive interaction techniques, which may encounter limitations by remote services. Herein, we examine patient and otolaryngology provider satisfaction, cost, and encounter efficiency between virtual and in-person interpretation among adults who speak Mandarin and Cantonese.
Methods:
This study is a prospective, randomized controlled trial in patients with moderate-to-severe bilateral hearing loss, Limited English Proficiency, and a primary language of Mandarin or Cantonese. Fifty-two patients were randomized to either in-person or virtual interpretation conditions. Patient satisfaction was measured using an 8-item Likert scale assessing communication effectiveness, encounter efficiency, and overall quality. Otolaryngology provider satisfaction was measured using a 1-item Likert scale. Encounter time, cost, and communication difficulty were measured and compared using independent sample t-tests.
Results:
Patient and otolaryngology provider satisfaction scores were significantly higher with in-person interpretation (p < 0.05 for 7 of 8 patient items; physician mean score 4.9, p < 0.001, r = 0.54) compared to virtual interpretation (physician mean 3.8) conditions, while overall quality of the encounter remained the same. There was no significant difference in the length of encounters or in the number of times patients requested interpreter repetition between groups. A difference in average cost existed for in-person interpretation ($14.50) compared to video interpretation ($25) services for an average length appointment.
Conclusion:
Patients and otolaryngologists reported higher overall satisfaction with in-person compared to virtual interpretation services. In-person interpretation yielded better comprehension in the hearing loss population among Mandarin and Cantonese-speaking patients and demonstrated a cost advantage over virtual interpretation.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Role of Communication in the Nursing Process II: Planning and Implementation
Documentation in Long-Term and Home Healthcare Setting
Long-Term Care Facilities
Current Trends in Nursing II
Role of Communication in the Nursing Process III: Evaluation and Documentation
Barriers to Effective Communication II
Cultural barriers:
Differences in values, beliefs, religion, knowledge, and tradition can significantly impact communication. Awareness of nonverbal cues is critical, especially when conversing with a patient from a different culture. What appears appropriate in one culture may be inappropriate in another.
Semantic barriers:
As a result of their tendency to use...

