Is video interpretation compromising care for the hearing loss population?

Area of Science:

• Otolaryngology
• Communication Sciences
• Health Services Research

Background:

• Hearing impairment and language barriers create significant communication challenges in otolaryngology.
• Limited research compares interpretation methods for patients with hearing loss.
• Virtual interpretation may limit reliance on visual cues vital for those with hearing loss.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare patient and otolaryngologist satisfaction, cost, and efficiency between virtual and in-person interpretation.
• To evaluate interpretation methods for Mandarin and Cantonese-speaking adults with hearing loss.

Main Methods:

• Prospective randomized controlled trial involving 52 patients with moderate-to-severe bilateral hearing loss and Limited English Proficiency.
• Patients randomized to in-person or virtual interpretation.
• Satisfaction measured via Likert scales; encounter time, cost, and communication difficulty analyzed.

Main Results:

• In-person interpretation yielded significantly higher patient and provider satisfaction (p < 0.05 for 7/8 patient items; physician mean 4.9 vs. 3.8).
• No significant differences in encounter length or repetition requests.
• In-person interpretation was more cost-effective ($14.50) than virtual ($25).

Conclusions:

• In-person interpretation is superior for patient and otolaryngologist satisfaction in this population.
• In-person services enhance comprehension for Mandarin/Cantonese speakers with hearing loss.
• In-person interpretation presents a cost advantage over virtual options.