Hear Our Voice: Pediatric Communication Barriers From the Perspectives of Refugee Mothers With Limited English Proficiency.

BACKGROUND: Adverse health outcomes are more common for health consumers with limited English proficiency (LEP). This study examines the consumer experience of refugee mothers with LEP when communicating with paediatric health services. METHOD: A community-based participatory qualitative study engaging participants from refugee-like backgrounds. Focus groups and in-depth individual interviews (using professional interpreters) were conducted in community settings and analysed using Grounded Theory principles. RESULTS: Fifty ethnolinguistically diverse participants reported universal communication barriers; (i) "Negative health care experiences" (fear, helplessness, lack of safety, trust and dignity), (ii) "Ineffective health service communication and adverse outcomes", (iii) "Logistical access barriers" and (iv) self-sourced solutions". The "importance of professional interpreter utilisation" and subsequent "sense of empowerment" was unanimous. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights gaps in current health interactions which negatively impact care, inclusion, and culturally safe engagement. Recommendations include orgainzational reform enhancing language services, increased cultural competency, long term support, and research with LEP populations.

Impact of professional interpreters on outcomes for hospitalized children from migrant and refugee families with limited English proficiency: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the review was to identify, critically appraise and synthesize evidence on the impact of professional interpreters on outcomes for hospitalized children from migrant and refugee families with limited English proficiency. INTRODUCTION: A key strategy to facilitate effective communication between limited-English-proficient migrant and refugee families and healthcare providers is the use of professional interpreters. Despite awareness of the importance of professional interpreters, interpreters are underutilized. This results in suboptimal care, including poor access to health care, increased risk of serious medical events, increased admission to hospital and inadequate health literacy. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Limited-English-proficient migrant, refugee or asylum-seeker families with a hospitalized child aged 0 to 18 years, who had used a professional interpreter, were considered for this review. Comparators included standard care or no interpreter, and reported results of comparisons of the duration, frequency or mode of interpreter delivery. Outcomes were length of stay in hospital, unplanned readmission rates to hospital, non-attendance at hospital clinic appointments and ambulatory care, child and/or parent satisfaction with care in hospital, adherence to treatment, medication errors, and other adverse events relating to patient safety. The review considered all studies conducted using a quantitative approach. METHODS: A three-step search strategy was used. Databases were searched in December 2018 for published and unpublished articles. Studies published in English were considered for inclusion. The recommended JBI approach to critical appraisal, study selection, data extraction and data synthesis was used. RESULTS: Six articles reporting results from three randomized controlled trials and one observational study were included. Studies were undertaken in the United States involving Spanish-speaking participants. Three studies were in emergency departments. There was a total of 1813 families, of whom 1753 had limited English proficiency. Migrant and refugee families with limited English proficiency reported greater satisfaction with aspects of care when a professional interpreter service was used compared with using ad hoc interpreters. Using professional in-person interpreters resulted in a shorter total emergency department throughput time compared to using professional interpreters via telephone. There was no difference in concordance of child's discharge diagnoses between parents assigned professional interpreters and those assigned bilingual physicians. Video interpretation provided better understanding of diagnoses than phone interpretation. CONCLUSION: There is evidence that use of ad hoc interpreters or no interpreter is inferior to use of professional interpreters of any mode. Although video and in-person interpreters are more favorable for some outcomes, mode of delivery may not be as important as the fact that a professional interpreter is being used. The mode of professional interpreter delivery should be based on accessibility, availability, language requirements and patient preference. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42017058161.

Use of professional interpreters for children and families with limited English proficiency: The intersection with quality and safety.

AIM: Linguistic diversity is increasing nationally; patients with limited English proficiency require provision of professional interpreters. We reviewed hospital-wide use of interpreters for low English proficiency in a tertiary hospital across emergency (ED), outpatient and inpatient presentations. METHODS: Two cohorts with low English proficiency presenting to Princess Margaret Hospital were audited. Records of new Refugee Health Service patients (presenting between January and July 2015) and non-Refugee Health Service low English proficiency patients (obtained through Language Services bookings) were reviewed to assess demographic profiles and use of interpreters for any occasion of service over the following 12 months (for each patient). RESULTS: Data from 188 patients were reviewed (Refugee Health Service: 119 patients; non-Refugee Health Service: 69 patients; total 1027 occasions of service); all were under 18 years of age. High socio-economic disadvantage and limited education was noted. Almost all (98.5%) had low English proficiency; 3 Refugee Health Service parents spoke English; 68% of non-Refugee Health Service patients were in families previously transitioned from that service. Interpreter use was poor across all areas. Thirty-four patients had 46 inpatient admissions with documented interpreter use for 59% (20/34) of these. All patients underwent at least one procedure, with no instances of interpreter documentation for procedure consent. Documented interpreter use was minimal in outpatient occasions of service (32/118, 27% Refugee Health Service; 18/222, 8% non-Refugee Health Service). Only one Refugee Health Service patient had evidence of ED interpreter use, out of 78 ED occasions of service (34 patients). CONCLUSIONS: Despite documented low English proficiency, suboptimal and inadequate use of professional interpreters persists. Low English proficiency patients are vulnerable, with socio-economic disadvantage, likely to impact on health outcomes and compliance. Organisational risk also is highlighted, including impact on clinical handover, informed consent and non-compliance with state language services policy. Further staff education and quality improvement work is essential.

Impact of professional interpreters on outcomes of hospitalized children from migrant and refugee families with low English proficiency: a systematic review protocol.

REVIEW QUESTION/OBJECTIVE: The overall objective is to identify, critically appraise and synthesize evidence on the impact of professional interpreters on outcomes for hospitalized children (aged 0-18 years) from migrant and refugee families with low English proficiency.More specifically, does the intervention of the use of a professional interpreter for migrant and refugee families with low English proficiency impact on.