Cargando…
Interpreter proxy versus healthcare interpreter for administration of patient surveys following arthroplasty: a pilot study
BACKGROUND: Clinical quality registries and other systems that conduct routine post-discharge surveillance of patient outcomes following surgery may have difficulty surveying patients who have limited proficiency in the language of the healthcare provider. Interpreter proxies (family and carers) are...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6854892/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31726990 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-019-0854-1 |
_version_ | 1783470305779384320 |
---|---|
author | Xue, Daniel Churches, Timothy Armstrong, Elizabeth Mittal, Rajat Naylor, Justine Maree Harris, Ian Andrew |
author_facet | Xue, Daniel Churches, Timothy Armstrong, Elizabeth Mittal, Rajat Naylor, Justine Maree Harris, Ian Andrew |
author_sort | Xue, Daniel |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Clinical quality registries and other systems that conduct routine post-discharge surveillance of patient outcomes following surgery may have difficulty surveying patients who have limited proficiency in the language of the healthcare provider. Interpreter proxies (family and carers) are often used due to limited access to certified healthcare interpreters (due to cost or availability). The aim of this study was to assess the reliability of engaging interpreter proxies compared with certified healthcare interpreters for the administration of patient-reported health-related surveys for people with limited English proficiency (LEP). METHODS: People with LEP and due for a routine 6-month telephone follow-up post knee or hip arthroplasty were invited to participate. Participants were randomly allocated to having their first interview with an interpreter proxy or a certified healthcare interpreter followed by the second (crossover) interview within 2 weeks (range: 4 to 12 days) after the first interview using the alternative method. Agreement between the two methods was assessed using quadratic weighted Cohen’s kappa, intraclass correlation and concordance correlation co-efficient where appropriate for EQ-5D health domains, total Oxford hip and knee scores, patient satisfaction, operation success, readmission, reoperation, and post-surgical complication responses. The mean of the differences between the same data items collected by each of the two methods was also calculated. RESULTS: Eighty five participants (96%) completed the study. There was substantial to excellent inter-rater agreement (kappa = 0.69–0.87 and ICCs above 0.74) for all but one measure. The mean differences between family proxy and healthcare interpreter scores for each participant were small, ranging from 0.01 (score range of 1–5) to 0.72 (score range of 0–100). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that using interpreter proxies is a reliable alternative to certified healthcare interpreters in conducting patient-reported health surveys, potentially making this process easier and cost effective for researchers and registries. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6854892 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-68548922019-11-21 Interpreter proxy versus healthcare interpreter for administration of patient surveys following arthroplasty: a pilot study Xue, Daniel Churches, Timothy Armstrong, Elizabeth Mittal, Rajat Naylor, Justine Maree Harris, Ian Andrew BMC Med Res Methodol Research Article BACKGROUND: Clinical quality registries and other systems that conduct routine post-discharge surveillance of patient outcomes following surgery may have difficulty surveying patients who have limited proficiency in the language of the healthcare provider. Interpreter proxies (family and carers) are often used due to limited access to certified healthcare interpreters (due to cost or availability). The aim of this study was to assess the reliability of engaging interpreter proxies compared with certified healthcare interpreters for the administration of patient-reported health-related surveys for people with limited English proficiency (LEP). METHODS: People with LEP and due for a routine 6-month telephone follow-up post knee or hip arthroplasty were invited to participate. Participants were randomly allocated to having their first interview with an interpreter proxy or a certified healthcare interpreter followed by the second (crossover) interview within 2 weeks (range: 4 to 12 days) after the first interview using the alternative method. Agreement between the two methods was assessed using quadratic weighted Cohen’s kappa, intraclass correlation and concordance correlation co-efficient where appropriate for EQ-5D health domains, total Oxford hip and knee scores, patient satisfaction, operation success, readmission, reoperation, and post-surgical complication responses. The mean of the differences between the same data items collected by each of the two methods was also calculated. RESULTS: Eighty five participants (96%) completed the study. There was substantial to excellent inter-rater agreement (kappa = 0.69–0.87 and ICCs above 0.74) for all but one measure. The mean differences between family proxy and healthcare interpreter scores for each participant were small, ranging from 0.01 (score range of 1–5) to 0.72 (score range of 0–100). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that using interpreter proxies is a reliable alternative to certified healthcare interpreters in conducting patient-reported health surveys, potentially making this process easier and cost effective for researchers and registries. BioMed Central 2019-11-14 /pmc/articles/PMC6854892/ /pubmed/31726990 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-019-0854-1 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Xue, Daniel Churches, Timothy Armstrong, Elizabeth Mittal, Rajat Naylor, Justine Maree Harris, Ian Andrew Interpreter proxy versus healthcare interpreter for administration of patient surveys following arthroplasty: a pilot study |
title | Interpreter proxy versus healthcare interpreter for administration of patient surveys following arthroplasty: a pilot study |
title_full | Interpreter proxy versus healthcare interpreter for administration of patient surveys following arthroplasty: a pilot study |
title_fullStr | Interpreter proxy versus healthcare interpreter for administration of patient surveys following arthroplasty: a pilot study |
title_full_unstemmed | Interpreter proxy versus healthcare interpreter for administration of patient surveys following arthroplasty: a pilot study |
title_short | Interpreter proxy versus healthcare interpreter for administration of patient surveys following arthroplasty: a pilot study |
title_sort | interpreter proxy versus healthcare interpreter for administration of patient surveys following arthroplasty: a pilot study |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6854892/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31726990 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-019-0854-1 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT xuedaniel interpreterproxyversushealthcareinterpreterforadministrationofpatientsurveysfollowingarthroplastyapilotstudy AT churchestimothy interpreterproxyversushealthcareinterpreterforadministrationofpatientsurveysfollowingarthroplastyapilotstudy AT armstrongelizabeth interpreterproxyversushealthcareinterpreterforadministrationofpatientsurveysfollowingarthroplastyapilotstudy AT mittalrajat interpreterproxyversushealthcareinterpreterforadministrationofpatientsurveysfollowingarthroplastyapilotstudy AT naylorjustinemaree interpreterproxyversushealthcareinterpreterforadministrationofpatientsurveysfollowingarthroplastyapilotstudy AT harrisianandrew interpreterproxyversushealthcareinterpreterforadministrationofpatientsurveysfollowingarthroplastyapilotstudy |