Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT01986179

Comparing Remote Interpreter Modalities in the Pediatric Emergency Department

Professional interpretation improves quality of care for patients with limited English proficiency (LEP). However, many health care settings lack access to professional interpreters, and even in locations with good access, logistical factors and perceived barriers have limited their widespread use. Remote methods of professional interpretation, including telephone and video, hold great promise for expanding access, but only limited data exist on the relative impacts of these modalities on patient care and provider uptake. Comparing how these modalities impact multiple aspects of health care quality, including family comprehension, provider communication, and consistency of provider interpreter use will inform dissemination of strategies for delivery of safe, efficient, and equitable care to LEP families.

Aim 1: To determine whether randomly assigned remote interpreter modality (telephone versus video) impacts parent-reported quality of communication and interpretation, diagnosis comprehension, and length of stay (LOS) among LEP Spanish-speaking families seen in a pediatric Emergency Department (ED).

Hypothesis 1: Parent-reported quality of communication and interpretation and parent diagnosis comprehension will be higher among families assigned to video interpretation compared to telephone interpretation.

Hypothesis 2: LOS will not differ between families assigned to video and telephone interpretation.

Aim 2: To determine whether assigned interpreter modality is associated with provider decision to communicate without professional interpretation.

Hypothesis 3: Parent-reported provider communication without professional interpretation (e.g. using the patient or a family member to interpret for some part of the visit) will be lower for families assigned to video interpretation compared to telephone interpretation.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Age range

1 day–18 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Seattle Children's Hospital Emergency Department

Seattle, Washington, 98105, United States

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Preferred language for medical care of Spanish
  • At least one primary caregiver requires interpretation
  • Presenting to Seattle Children's ED during recruiting hours

Exclusion criteria

  • Triage level 1 (life-threatening illness)
  • No parent or legal guardian present
  • Reason for visit is concern for abuse
  • reason for visit is primary behavioral or psychiatric complaint

Treatment and study plan

Telephone Interpretation

Other

Professional interpretation provided over the phone by a national network of certified medical interpreters

Video Interpretation

Other

Professional interpretation provided over video by a national network of certified medical interpreters

Primary outcomes

  1. Communication Quality

    Time frame: Once, 1-7 days after the ED visit

    We will use the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) Child Visit Survey 2.0 communication composite, which includes 5 items.

  2. Interpretation Quality

    Time frame: Once, 1-7 days after ED visit

    Interpretation quality will be measured with the Interpreter Satisfaction Survey (7 items).

  3. Diagnosis Comprehension

    Time frame: Once, 1-7 days after ED visit

    Parents will be asked to name their child's diagnosis. Clinician-recorded diagnosis will be obtained from chart review for comparison. Responses will be classified as correct, incorrect, or vague/incomplete, using a method we have employed previously.

  4. Consistency of Interpreter Use

    Time frame: Once, 1-7 days after ED visit

    Parents will be asked to report on the frequency with which providers used each of a list of potential communication methods (e.g. telephone interpreter, family or friend, spoke in English without an interpreter present). Response options are never, sometimes, frequently, or always.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Length of ED stay

    Time frame: Once, after ED visit

    Time from arrival in Emergency Department to discharge home or admission to the hospital.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Seattle Children's Hospital

Other

Registry information

Official study title

Impact of Remote Interpreter Modality on Comprehension, Communication Quality, and Consistency of Interpreter Use in the Pediatric Emergency Department

Important dates

Study start
2014
Primary completion
2014
Study completion
2014
First posted
Nov 18, 2013
Registry last updated
May 20, 2015

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.