Assessing the Impact of Vidéo Remote Sign Language Interpreting in Healthcare (Impact of VRI)

November 28, 2023 updated by: Minerva Rivas Velarde, University of Geneva, Switzerland

Assessing the Impact of Vidéo Remote Sign Language Interpreting in Healthcare: Linking Disability Studies With Empirical Challenges of Public Health Research

This is a randomise study that looks at what is the effectiveness of the VRI system in improving communication outcomes between Deaf patients and doctors versus the 'available standard of care of the usual communication tools, including informal interpretation, lip or note reading, using their mobile phones to contact a formal or informal interpreter, for Deaf patients aged 18 and older in Bogota Colombia

Study Overview

Status

Enrolling by invitation

Conditions

Intervention / Treatment

Detailed Description

Background and Rationale:

In-person or VRI sign language interpretation is largely unavailable. In a scoping review, the researchers identified a knowledge gap regarding the quality of interpretation and training in sign language interpretation for health care. The researchers also found that this area is under-researched, and the evidence is scant. All available evidence came from high-income countries, which is particularly problematic given that most DHH persons live in low- and middle-income countries. Thus, the available literature shows that VRI may enable deaf users to overcome interpretation barriers and can potentially improve communication outcomes between them and health personnel within health care services. For VRI to be acceptable, sign language users require a VRI system supported by devices with large screens and a reliable internet connection, as well as qualified interpreters trained in medical interpretation. There is no clear data on the availability of VRI or in-person interpretation. Given the cost, VRI may be more available than in person. Available data tend to focus on assessing personal references of Deaf users in regards to interpretation, as well as interpreters' preferences and maximising recourses allocation.

Objective(S):

To assess the effectiveness of the VRI system in improving communication outcomes between Deaf patients and doctors Produce a VRI model addressing the challenges faced by Deaf people that will be tested, implemented, and sustained in Bogota, Colombia.

Explanation for choice of comparator

In-person or VRI sign language interpretation is largely unavailable. Thus, there is no clear data on the magnitude of the availability gap of VRI or in-person interpretation. In-person qualified sign language interpretation in the healthcare setting tends to be described as the ideal standard of service provision. Thus, it is largely unavailable even in HIC. The assumption is based upon minimal available evidence on the personal preferences of Deaf persons in the USA. There is no evidence that in-person interpretation is efficient in the context of weaker infrastructure, such as low sign language literacy rates across Deaf persons, lack of standard qualification of interpreters and lack of interpreters and sustainable financing in HIC. To my knowledge, there is no study assessing DPC while using sign language interpretation.

Given the cost, VRI may be more sustainable than in-person. Assessing the efficiency of VRI versus the standard of care would be d of more value, given that there is no other effective intervention to compare.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Estimated)

183

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

      • Bogota, Colombia, 110831
        • Clínica Nuestra Señora de la Paz
      • Bogotá, Colombia, 111411
        • Hospital Universitario Mayor Méderi

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

  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Uses Colombian Sign Language as the preferred language.
  • Enough sensorimotor, cognitive and communication skills to communicate independently with health personnel

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Does not communicate using sign language.
  • Additional impairments which affect language development or the use of sign language.
  • Refusal of the participant's representative(s) to participate in the study,
  • Refusal of the participant's representative(s) to participate in a modality of the study,

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: Experimental VRI sign language interpretation
Participants will be provided with a Tablet of 14' inches with interrupted VRI in Colombian Sign Language. Professionally accredited Sign language interpreter. At the end of the hospital visit, they will complete a scale measuring Doctor-Patient-Communication
To assess the effectiveness of the VRI system in improving communication outcomes between Deaf patients and doctors Produce a VRI model addressing the challenges faced by Deaf people that will be tested, implemented, and sustained in Bogota Colombia.
No Intervention: Experimental: primo control
Participants get welcome at the entry point of the hospital, they are not provided with VRI. At the end of the hospital visit, they will complete a scale measuring Doctor-Patient-communication

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Communication outcomes
Time Frame: 12 months

The score of a selected' scale assesses A: creating a good interpersonal relationship, B: exchanging information, and C: Making treatment-related decisions that involve the patients in decision-making.

The results of the scale will be asses using descriptive analytics (Fisher exact test will be applied to compare the 2 groups) Multiple regression analysis will be applied using demographic data and health indicators.

12 months

Collaborators and Investigators

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

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 (Actual)

August 24, 2023

Primary Completion (Estimated)

July 14, 2024

Study Completion (Estimated)

July 14, 2024

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

July 17, 2023

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

July 25, 2023

First Posted (Actual)

July 28, 2023

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

November 29, 2023

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

November 28, 2023

Last Verified

November 1, 2023

More Information

Terms related to this study

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

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 Deafness

Clinical Trials on Video Remote Interpretation

Subscribe