ArticleCJEM2026
The impact of language barriers on patient care in the emergency department.
Article in CJEM, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Navigating Emergency Care After Injury: A Qualitative Study of Asylum Seekers and Refugees in England and Wales Using the Candidacy Framework (BE SURE Study).Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- Gaps in Documenting Interpreter Service Utilization Among Emergency Department Clinicians Treating Patients With Limited English Proficiency.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesCanada is a multicultural country. However, many frontline healthcare providers only speak English. Previous studies have shown that language barriers can impact care, but limited Canadian data exist. This study aims to determine the utilization of interpreter services and the impact of language barriers on Emergency Department (ED) patient care in a Canadian setting.
methodsA health records review was conducted of ED patients' ≥ 18 years old with a documented preferred language, who presented to two Canadian tertiary care EDs between November 2019 and October 2020. The primary outcome was the impact of the language barrier on ED length of stay, investigations ordered, disposition, 30 day return ED visits, and use of interpreter services. Secondary outcomes included the type of interpreter services and their impact on the above ED care metrics. Statistical analysis was performed using a two-sided T-test, and chi-square tests with Bonferroni correction, and multivariable logistic regression.
resultsA total of 1266 patients were included, with 427, 434, and 405 patients identified as having a primary language of English, French, or Other, respectively. Language barriers were identified in 462 patients (36.5%) and only 52.2% utilized interpreter services. Comparing patients with and without language barriers, patients with language barriers had significantly longer ED length of stay (mean 406.9 vs. 342.4 min, p < 0.001), a higher proportion of investigations in the ED, hospitalizations, and return ED visits (blood work 68.8% vs. 52.5%, p < 0.001; imaging 53.9% vs. 47.4%, p = 0.026; hospitalized 19.7% vs. 12.3%, p < 0.001; return ED visits 23.6% vs. 15.6%, p < 0.001). Of those who received translation, 198 (82.2%) utilized a family member and only 12 (5%) used a professional translation service.
conclusionsOur findings demonstrate underutilization of professional interpreter services despite available services in the ED. Furthermore, the results highlight that care inequities still exist and support the importance of continued advocacy for improved access to interpreter services and further investigations to mitigate the barriers in accessing these services.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41184602What 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.