Skip to main content
Log in

Challenges in Language Services: Identifying and Responding to Patients’ Needs

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective Identify characteristics of hospital-based language services (LS), and describe practices of identifying patients with limited English proficiency (LEP) and interpreter training. Participants Seventy-one hospitals applied to participate in a national initiative. Applicants were non-federal, acute care hospitals with substantial LEP populations, at least 10,000 discharges, and in-person interpreters. Methods Descriptive statistics were generated on language, collection of language data, LEP volume and service utilization, staffing and training requirements and organizational structure. The relationship between admissions and encounters was analyzed. Results Ninety percent of hospitals collect primary language data. Spanish is the most common language (93% of hospitals). We found no statistically significant correlation between admissions and encounters. Eighty-four percent require training. Eighty-nine percent have a designated LS department but no clear organizational home. Conclusions Hospital-based LS programs are facing challenges identifying patients with language needs, staffing and training a workforce, and creating an organizational identity. Need is not associated with utilization, suggesting that LS are not reaching patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Flores G. Language barriers to health care in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:229–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Flores G, Laws MB, Mayo SJ, Zuckerman B, Abreu M, Medina L, et al. Errors in medical interpretation and their potential clinical consequences in pediatric encounters. Pediatrics. 2003;111:6–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Siejo R, Gomez H, Friendenberg J. Language as a communication barrier in medical care for hispanic patients. In: Padilla AM, editor. Hispanic psychology–critical issues in theory and research. California: Sage Publications; 1995. p. 169–81.

  4. Wurthlin Worldwide. Hablamos Juntos: we speak together, 2001. www.hablamosjuntos.org.

  5. Ku L. How race/ethnicity, immigration status and language affect health insurance coverage, access to care and quality of care among the low-income population. District of Columbia: Kaiser Family Foundation; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Flores G. The impact of medical interpreter services on the quality of health care: a systematic review. Med Care Res Rev. 2005;62:255–99.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Smedley BD, Stith AY, Nelson AR. Unequal treatment: confronting racial and ethnic health disparities. District of Columbia: National Academy Press; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Baker DW, Parker RM, Williams MV, Coates WC, Pitkin K. Use and effectiveness of interpreters in an emergency department. JAMA. 1996;275:783–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Andrulis D, Goodman N, Pryor N. What a difference an interpreter can make: health care experiences of uninsured with limited English proficiency. Massachusetts: The Access Project; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  10. David RA, Rhee M. The impact of language as a barrier to effective health care in an underserved urban Hispanic community. Mt Sinai J Med. 1998;65:393–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kuo D, Fagan MJ. Satisfaction with methods of Spanish interpretation in an ambulatory care clinic. J Gen Intern Med. 1999;14:547–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lee LJ, Batal HA, Maselli JH, et al. Effect of Spanish interpretation method on patient satisfaction in an urban walk-in clinic. J Gen Intern Med. 2002;17:641–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kashiwagi S. A functional manual for providing linguistically competent health care services as developed by a community health center. California: Asian Pacific Health Care Venture, Inc; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Paez K, Gunter M, Brach C. Planning culturally and linguistically appropriate services: a guide for managed care plans. Maryland: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Office of Minority Health, Department of Health and Human Services. Health care professionals’ perspectives on the content and structure of the draft health care language services implementation guide (HC-LSIG). Developed by the American Institutes for Research. Maryland: Office of Minority Health; 2005.

  16. Downing B, Roat C. Models for the provision of language access in health care settings. California: National Council on Interpreting in Health Care and Hablamos Juntos; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Office of Minority Health, Department of Health and Human Services. A patient-centered guide to implementing language access services in healthcare organizations. Prepared by American Institutes of Research. Maryland: Office of Minority Health; 2005.

  18. 42 U.S.C. Sec. 2000d-4a; United States Department of Justice’s Policy Guidance on the Enforcement of Title VI, dated August 11, 2000, 65 Fed. Reg. 52762-52774, dated August 30, 2000.

  19. Massachusetts Department of Public Health, Office of Minority Health. Best practice recommendations for hospital-based interpreter services. Massachusetts: Office of Minority Health; undated.

  20. The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Speaking together: national language services network, 2006 call for proposals. New Jersey: The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation; 2006.

  21. Langley G, Nolan K, Nolan T, Norman C, Provost L. The improvement guide: a practical approach to enhancing organizational performance. California: Jossey-Bass; 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  22. American Hospital Association. 2005 Annual survey of members. Illinois: American Hospital Association; 2006.

  23. Stata Corp. Stata statistical software: release 9.0. College Station, TX: Stata Corporation; 2005.

  24. U.S. Census Bureau. Census regions: cartographic boundary files descriptions and metadata [Webpage]. District of Columbia: U.S. Census Bureau. Accessed September 28, 2006, from http://www.census.gov/geo/www/cob/rg_metadata.html.

  25. Hasnain-Wynia R, Pittman M. Who, when and how the current state of race, ethnicity and primary language data collection in US hospitals. New York: The Commonwealth Fund; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Regenstein M, Sickler D. Race, ethnicity and language of patients: hospital practices regarding collection of information to address disparities in health care. District of Columbia: National Public Health and Hospital Institute; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Regenstein M, Huang J, West C, Mead H, Trott J, Stegun M. Hospital language services: quality improvement and performance measures. Advances in patient safety: new directions and alternative approaches. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2008 (in press).

  28. Regenstein M. Measuring and improving the quality of hospital language services insights from the speaking together collaborative. J Gen Intern Med. 2007;22(Suppl 2):356–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Support for the study comes from The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The views expressed here are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation or its directors, officers, or staff.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marsha Regenstein.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Regenstein, M., Mead, H., Muessig, K.E. et al. Challenges in Language Services: Identifying and Responding to Patients’ Needs. J Immigrant Minority Health 11, 476–481 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10903-008-9157-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10903-008-9157-z

Keywords

Navigation