ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2003
Impact of interpretation method on clinic visit length.
Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
39 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Is Primary Care Patient Experience Associated with Provider-Patient Language Concordance and Use of Interpreters for Spanish-preferring Patients: A Systematic Literature Review.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2025Pooled it
- Professional Interpreter Services and the Impact on Hospital Care Outcomes: An Integrative Review of Literature.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Pooled it
- Electronic Tools to Bridge the Language Gap in Health Care for People Who Have Migrated: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Pooled it
- Do professional interpreters improve clinical care for patients with limited English proficiency? A systematic review of the literature.Health services research · 2007Pooled it
- Comparing in-person, video, and telephonic medical interpretation.Journal of general internal medicine · 2010Trial
- Wearable Real-Time Translation in Rhinology: A Comparative Study of Accuracy and Efficiency.International forum of allergy & rhinology · 2026Article
- Effect of Language Interpreter Modalities on Patient Satisfaction and Clinical Workflow: A Pilot Study in a Multidisciplinary Pediatric Craniofacial Clinic.The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association · 2026Article
- Language Concordance and Interpreter Use in Primary Care: Perspectives from Spanish-preferring Patients.Journal of immigrant and minority health · 2026Article
- Clinic Flow Metrics Before and After Relocation to a New Academic Eye Institute.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Managing consultation duration in primary care: A systematic review with health equity insights.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2025Review
- Evaluation of Disparities in Emergency Department Admission and Wait Times for Non-English Preferred Patients.The western journal of emergency medicine · 2025Article
- Frontline perspectives on barriers to care for patients with California Medicaid: a qualitative study.International journal for equity in health · 2024Article
- Medical Interpreting Services for Refugees in Canada: Current State of Practice and Considerations in Promoting this Essential Human Right for All.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
- A sequential, multiple assignment randomized trial comparing web-based education to mobile video interpreter access for improving provider interpreter use in primary care clinics: the mVOCAL hybrid type 3 study protocol.Implementation science : IS · 2023Article
- Exploring the limitations of language interpretation: A qualitative study on clinicians' experiences at French Office of Immigration and Integration.PLOS global public health · 2023Article
- Interpreter services and effect on healthcare - a systematic review of the impact of different types of interpreters on patient outcome.Journal of migration and health · 2023Review
- Exploring the Impact of Language Concordance on Cancer Communication.JCO oncology practice · 2022Article
- Inclusion of Non-English-Speaking Participants in Studies of Parkinson's Disease: A Call to Action.Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society · 2022Article
- Health Equity and Disparities in ROP Care: A Need for Systematic Evaluation.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Review
- Promoting HIV, Hepatitis B Virus, and Hepatitis C Virus Screening Among Migrants With a Language Barrier: Protocol for the Development and Evaluation of an Electronic App (Apidé).JMIR research protocols · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine the impact of interpretation method on outpatient visit length.
designTime-motion study.
settingHospital-based outpatient teaching clinic.
participantsPatients presenting for scheduled outpatient visits. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN
resultsOver a 6-week study period, a research assistant recorded the following information for consecutive patient visits: patient age, gender and insurance type; type of interpreter used (none, hospital interpreter, telephone interpreter or patient-supplied interpreter); scheduled visit length; provider type (nurse practitioner; attending physician; resident in postgraduate year 1, 2 or 3, or medical student); provider gender; amount of time the patient spent in the examination room with the provider (provider time); and total time the patient spent in the clinic from check-in to checkout (clinic time). When compared to patients not requiring an interpreter, patients using some form of interpreter had longer mean provider times (32.4 minutes [min] vs 28.0 min, P <.001) and clinic times (93.6 min vs 82.4 min, P =.002). Compared to patients not requiring an interpreter, patients using a telephone interpreter had significantly longer mean provider times (36.3 min vs 28.0 min, P <.001) and clinic times (99.9 min vs 82.4 min, P =.02). Similarly, patients using a patient-supplied interpreter had longer mean provider times (34.4 min vs 28.0 min, P <.001) and mean clinic times (92.8 min vs 82.4 min, P =.027). In contrast, patients using a hospital interpreter did not have significantly different mean provider times (26.8 min vs 28.0 min, P =.51) or mean clinic times (91.0 min vs 82.4 min, P =.16) than patients not requiring an interpreter.
conclusionIn our setting, telephone and patient-supplied interpreters were associated with longer visit times, but full-time hospital interpreters were not.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.