Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30511122›Full record

ArticleJournal of racial and ethnic health disparities2019

Identifying and Addressing Language Needs in Primary Care: a Pilot Implementation Study.

Jessica E Murphy, David Washington, Ziming Xuan, Michael K Paasche-Orlow, Mari-Lynn Drainoni

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Shades of care: Understanding the needs of racially and ethnically diverse paediatric patients, their families, and health care providers in North America.Journal of child health care : for professionals working with children in the hospital and community · 2023
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jessica E MurphySection of General Internal Medicine, Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, 245 Chapman Street, Suite 300, Providence, RI, 02905, USA. jessica_murphy1@brown.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0908-3610
David WashingtonDepartment of General Internal Medicine and Pediatrics, Texas Gulf Coast Medical System, 250 Blossom Street, Suite 400, Webster, TX, 77598, USA.
Ziming XuanDepartment of Community Health Sciences, Boston University School of Public Health, 801 Massachusetts Ave, Boston, MA, 02118, USA.
Michael K Paasche-OrlowSection of General Internal Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, 801 Massachusetts Ave, Boston, MA, 02118, USA.
Mari-Lynn DrainoniDepartment of Health Law, Policy, and Management, Boston University School of Public Health, 715 Albany Street, Boston, MA, 02118, USA.
Boston University · USBrown University · USRegional Medical Center · US

Funding

Project-005UL1TR001430 · NCATS · BOSTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CAMPUS · PI BAIR-MERRITT, MEGAN H, CENTER, DAVID M. · 2015 to 2024
$52.3M
HRSA HHS D33HP25766NCATS NIH HHS 1UL1TR001430NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001430
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMedical interpreters improve care for patients with Limited English Proficiency but are underused. Protocols to improve interpreter use in primary care are needed.

methodsMedical Assistants (MAs) screened patients for language needs and arranged for telephone interpreters during rooming in two pilot clinics (PCs). We interviewed MAs and providers and analyzed interviews using modified grounded theory, linking themes to the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARiHS) framework categories of Context, Evidence, and Facilitation. Providers in PCs and four comparison clinics were surveyed.

resultsContext themes included issues with the telephone interpreter vendor; having established teams, roles and workflows; and difficulty incorporating time-sensitive tasks. Evidence themes included engagement in language screening; preferring in-person interpreters; improving the patient experience; and having mixed responses to the protocol. Facilitation themes included MAs needing more support. PC providers were more satisfied with care (OR = 12.7) and communication (OR = 7.6) than comparison clinic providers.

conclusionsThe protocol may improve patient care and communication, but implementation was inconsistent. Language screening is a complex process and further research is needed to improve screening questions and procedures. Future interventions should capitalize on team members' drives to improve patient care and control costs but also need to consider the impacts of health system changes, and to consider the culture, training needs, roles, and relationships of team members.

Indexed as

Communication BarriersLanguageNeeds AssessmentFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMalePhysician-Patient RelationsPilot ProjectsPrimary Health CareCommunication barriersCultural competencyEnglish proficiencyImplementationInterpretersLanguagePilot projects

Identifiers

PMID30511122
PMCPMC8005868
OpenAlexW2902675636

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.