Source:http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/id/20173271
Switch to
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| lifeskim:mentions |
umls-concept:C0033137,
umls-concept:C0042655,
umls-concept:C0127400,
umls-concept:C0150646,
umls-concept:C0542559,
umls-concept:C0545082,
umls-concept:C0679924,
umls-concept:C0871208,
umls-concept:C0871685,
umls-concept:C1513371,
umls-concept:C1519775,
umls-concept:C1548286,
umls-concept:C1571885,
umls-concept:C1571886,
umls-concept:C2698884
|
| pubmed:issue |
1
|
| pubmed:dateCreated |
2010-2-22
|
| pubmed:abstractText |
Linguistic interpretation ameliorates health disparities disfavoring underserved limited English-proficient patients, yet few studies have compared clinician satisfaction with these services. Self-administered clinician post-visit surveys compared the quality of interpretation and communication, visit satisfaction, degree of patient engagement, and cultural competence of visits using untrained people acting as interpreters (ad hoc), in-person professional, or video conferencing professional interpretation for 283 visits. Adjusting for clinician and patient characteristics, the quality of interpretation of in-person and video conferencing modes were rated similarly (OR 1.79, 95% CI 0.74, 4.33). The quality of in-person (OR 5.55, 95% CI 1.50, 20.51) and video conferencing (OR 3.10, 95% CI 1.16, 8.31) were rated higher than ad hoc interpretation. Self-assessed cultural competence was better for in-person versus video conferencing interpretation (OR 2.32, 95% CI 1.11, 4.86). Video conferencing interpretation increases access without compromising quality, but cultural nuances may be better addressed by in-person interpreters. Professional interpretation is superior to ad hoc (OR 4.15, 95% CI 1.43, 12.09).
|
| pubmed:grant | |
| pubmed:language |
eng
|
| pubmed:journal | |
| pubmed:citationSubset |
IM
|
| pubmed:status |
MEDLINE
|
| pubmed:month |
Feb
|
| pubmed:issn |
1548-6869
|
| pubmed:author | |
| pubmed:issnType |
Electronic
|
| pubmed:volume |
21
|
| pubmed:owner |
NLM
|
| pubmed:authorsComplete |
Y
|
| pubmed:pagination |
301-17
|
| pubmed:meshHeading |
pubmed-meshheading:20173271-Attitude of Health Personnel,
pubmed-meshheading:20173271-California,
pubmed-meshheading:20173271-Communication Barriers,
pubmed-meshheading:20173271-Cultural Competency,
pubmed-meshheading:20173271-Data Collection,
pubmed-meshheading:20173271-Health Services Accessibility,
pubmed-meshheading:20173271-Healthcare Disparities,
pubmed-meshheading:20173271-Humans,
pubmed-meshheading:20173271-Language,
pubmed-meshheading:20173271-Medically Underserved Area,
pubmed-meshheading:20173271-Odds Ratio,
pubmed-meshheading:20173271-Physician-Patient Relations,
pubmed-meshheading:20173271-Physicians,
pubmed-meshheading:20173271-Primary Health Care,
pubmed-meshheading:20173271-Quality of Health Care,
pubmed-meshheading:20173271-Translating,
pubmed-meshheading:20173271-Videoconferencing
|
| pubmed:year |
2010
|
| pubmed:articleTitle |
Clinician ratings of interpreter mediated visits in underserved primary care settings with ad hoc, in-person professional, and video conferencing modes.
|
| pubmed:affiliation |
Effectiveness Research Center for Diverse Populations, Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94143-0320, USA.
|
| pubmed:publicationType |
Journal Article,
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't,
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
|