Cost Effectiveness of Language Services in Hospital Emergency Departments (EDs)

September 29, 2015 updated by: Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.

Cost Effectiveness of Language Services in Hospital Emergency Departments

Numerous studies suggest that the use of in-person, professionally trained medical interpreters can reduce health care costs associated with diagnosing and treating patients with limited English proficiency. However, few studies have specifically addressed the question of the cost-effectiveness of language services in health care settings. This study used a randomized controlled study design to compare the cost-effectiveness of using professional interpreters with Spanish-speaking patients seen in hospital emergency departments (EDs) versus using the usual language services available to these patients. The main goal of the study was to estimate the effect that professional interpreters have on resource utilization and patient/provider satisfaction in the ED compared to the language services usually offered in these settings. Our hypothesis was that use of trained interpreters would lead to more cost-effective provision of ED services.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

447

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • New Jersey
      • Freehold, New Jersey, United States, 07728
        • CentraState Healthcare System
      • New Brunswick, New Jersey, United States, 08901
        • Robert Wood Johnson University Hospital

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Child
  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • limited English proficient (LEP) Spanish-speaking patients
  • adults aged 18 or older
  • LEP parents of children seen in emergency departments

Exclusion Criteria:

  • cognitively impaired, comatose, or traumatized patients
  • healthy volunteers
  • prisoners
  • hospital employees

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Health Services Research
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Professional medical interpreter
Limited English proficient Spanish-speaking patients seen in the treatment arm were provided with the services of a professionally-trained medical interpreter to facilitate communication between the patient and emergency department staff
All treatment interpreters were certified bilingual in Spanish and English and had completed (1) at least 40 hours of training in medical terminology, ethics, patient privacy, and basic interpreting skills; and (2) an online course in protection of human subjects.
No Intervention: Control, Usual Language Services
Patients randomized to the control arm receive the services of the emergency departments' usual language services (i.e., a telephone language line or ad hoc interpreters).

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Time Frame
Cost-effectiveness of in-person interpreters versus other language services
Time Frame: June 2009
June 2009

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Time Frame
Satisfaction with ability to communicate
Time Frame: June 2009
June 2009

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Study Director: Ann D Bagchi, Ph.D., Mathematica Policy Research
  • Principal Investigator: Stacy Dale, MPA, Mathematica Policy Research
  • Principal Investigator: Robert Eisenstein, MD, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

October 1, 2008

Primary Completion (Actual)

April 1, 2009

Study Completion (Actual)

January 1, 2010

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

December 28, 2009

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

December 29, 2009

First Posted (Estimate)

December 30, 2009

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

October 1, 2015

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

September 29, 2015

Last Verified

December 1, 2009

More Information

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Language Discordance

Clinical Trials on Professional medical interpreter

3
Subscribe