ArticleBMC health services research2025
Descriptive analysis of interpreter service mode costs & usage in Northwestern Wisconsin pre and peri COVID-19.
Article in BMC health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundInterpreter service mode (in person, audio, or video) can impact patient experiences and engagement in the healthcare system, but clinics must balance quality with costs and volume to deliver services. Videoconferencing and telephone services provide lower cost options, effective where on site interpreters are scarce, or patients with limited English proficiency (LEP) and/or interpreters are unable to visit healthcare centers. The COVID 19 pandemic generated these conditions in Northwest Wisconsin (NWWI). The objectives of our study were to describe visit characteristics for interpreter services pre and peri COVID-19 and how interpreter visits and costs differed by modality and language pre and peri COVID-19 at Mayo Clinic Health System (MCHS) Eau Claire and Menomonie, Wisconsin (WI).
methodsWe analyzed medical records and billing data from MCHS Eau Claire and Menomonie that included interpretation visit characteristics and aggregate costs. We performed descriptive analysis of visit characteristics and aggregate costs (dependent variables: cost, duration, language, modality, payer type, department, patient age, and patient biological sex) from June-December 2019, 2020 (independent variables). We used Pearson's chi-square and t tests to test for significant differences in visit characteristics between time periods.
resultsSignificant differences were found in distribution of all visit characteristics (language, p-value < .001; biological sex, p-value .011; mode, p-value < .001; payer type, p-value < .001; department, p-value < .001; age, p-value .016; visit duration in hours, p-value < .001) between 2019 and 2020 windows. Total costs of all interpretation modes increased between 2019 (in person, $188,109; audio, $15,734; video $15,881) and 2020 (in person, $388,500; audio, $44,376; video, $34,245) despite similar visit counts for both years (2019, 3750 visits; 2020, 3425 visits). Differences between years are consistent with COVID-19 protocols, department usage by language, and patient age.
conclusionsOur results show similar counts in the number of overall visits and increase in interpreter service costs in all modes, positively reflecting upon the availability of multimodal language resources.
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.