Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 10, 2026
Assessment of Audio-Tactile Sensory Substitution Training in Participants with Profound Deafness Using the Event-Related Potential Technique
Published on: September 7, 2022
Use and effectiveness of interpreters in an emergency department
D W Baker1, R M Parker, M V Williams
1Department of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30303, USA.
Objective:
To determine how often interpreters were used for Spanish- speaking patients, patients' perceived need for an interpreter, and the impact of interpreter use on patients' subjective and objective knowledge of their diagnosis and treatment.
Design:
Cross-sectional survey.
Setting:
Public hospital emergency department.
Patients:
A total of 467 native Spanish-speaking and 63 English-speaking Latino patients presenting with nonurgent medical problems.
Main Outcome Measures:
Patients' report of whether an interpreter was used, whether one was needed, self-perceived understanding of diagnosis and treatment, and objective knowledge of discharge instructions.
Results:
An interpreter was used for 26% of Spanish-speaking patients. For 52%, and interpreter was not used but was not thought to be necessary by the patient. A total of 22% said an interpreter was not used but should have been used. When both the patient's English and the examiner's Spanish were poor, an interpreter was not called 34% of the time, and 87% of the patients who did not have an interpreter thought one should have been used. Nurses and physicians interpreted most frequently (49%), and professional interpreters were used for only 12% of patients. Patients who said an interpreter was not necessary rated their understanding of their disease as good to excellent 67% of the time, compared with 57% of those who used an interpreter and 38% of those who thought an interpreter should have been used (P<.001). For understanding of treatment, the figures were 86%, 82%, and 58%, respectively (P<.001). However, when objective measures of understanding diagnosis and treatment were used, the differences between these groups were smaller and generally not statistically significant. There were no differences between English-speaking Latinos and native Spanish-speakers who said they did not need an interpreter.
Conclusions:
Interpreters are often not used despite a perceived need by patients, and the interpreters who are used usually lack formal training in this skill. Language concordance and interpreter use greatly affected patients' perceived understanding of their disease, but a high proportion of patients in all groups had poor knowledge of their diagnosis and recommended treatment.
More Related Videos
11:27A Modified Sonographic Algorithm for Image Acquisition in Life-Threatening Emergencies in the Critically Ill Newborn
Published on: April 7, 2023
04:05Clinical Application of Phase Angle and BIVA Z-Score Analyses in Patients Admitted to an Emergency Department with Acute Heart Failure
Published on: June 30, 2023
Related Concept Videos
01:21Interdisciplinary Care: The Health Care Team-I
Physicians
The physician's primary responsibility is to diagnose illness and direct the medical or surgical treatment of the condition. The authority to admit patients to a healthcare agency or institution and practice care within that setting is granted to physicians by the healthcare agency or institution itself.
01:18Interdisciplinary Care: The Health Care Team-II
Physical Therapist
A physical therapist (PT) aims to restore function or prevent additional impairment in a patient following an injury or disease. Massage, heat, cold, water, sonar waves, exercises, and electrical stimulation are some treatments used by PTs to treat...
01:26Types of Reports III: Telephone and Verbal Reports
Here's an overview of each type:
Telephone Orders
01:23Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation III: AED Use