Top

Published in:

01-10-2020 | Original Scientific Report

Provider–patient Language Discordance and Cancer Operations: Outcomes from a Single Center Linked to a State Vital Statistics Registry

Published in: World Journal of Surgery | Issue 10/2020

Abstract

Introduction

Patterns of worldwide immigration have resulted in high rates of discordance between medical providers and the patients they treat. For example, in the USA, 25 million individuals in the USA self-identified that they speak English less than “very well.” Previous studies have generated mixed results regarding differences in postoperative outcomes between English proficient (EP) and limited English proficient (LEP) patients. Our objective was to determine whether a difference in outcomes exists for non-English-speaking patients compared to English-speaking patients after operations commonly performed to treat cancer.

Study design

A retrospective cohort study was performed in an urban, safety net and tertiary referral medical center over a five-year period. Adult patients undergoing cancer operations were stratified as EP and LEP. We evaluated 30-day revisit to the ED, length of stay (LOS), long-term all-cause mortality, and any major complication on index admission. Regression was used to adjust for baseline comorbidities, case risk, and socioeconomic factors.

Results

A total of 2467 patients were included. There was no difference in case risk between language groups, but EP had a larger proportion of high comorbidity scores. Patients in the non-English group were more likely to be uninsured/self-pay and live in neighborhoods with lower median income. After adjustment, we found no difference in long-term mortality [hazard ratio: 0.87 (95% CI 0.52–1.45)]. LEP patients had the same LOS compared to primary EP patients with an IRR of 0.99 (95% CI 0.88–1.10). There was no difference in the odds of revisit to hospital for LEP versus EP, with an OR of 1.08, 95% CI [0.75–1.53] and no difference in major complication (OR 0.76 (95% CI 0.39–1.45).

Conclusions

We found no association between language and outcomes after cancer operations. This lack of difference may reflect local efficacy at treating non-English-speaking patients, and health systems with fewer services for LEP patients might show different results.

Available only for authorised users

US Census Bureau. Available at: https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2013/demo/2009-2013-lang-tables.html. Accessed May 23, 2019

Angela Potter-Collins. 2013. Available at: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/culturalidentity/language/articles/languageinenglandandwales/2013-03-04#main-language-in-england-and-wales

Hasnain-Wynia R, Yonek J, Pierce D et al. Hospital language services for patients with limited english proficiency: results from a national survey. American Hospital Association: Heatlh Res Edu Trust, 28

Betancourt JR, Green AR, Carrillo JE, Ananeh-Firempong O (2003) Defining cultural competence: a practical framework for addressing racial/ethnic disparities in health and health care. Public Health Rep 118:293–302CrossRef

John-Baptiste A, Naglie G, Tomlinson G et al (2004) The effect of English language proficiency on length of stay and in-hospital mortality. J Gen Intern Med 19:221–228CrossRef

Ngai KM, Grudzen CR, Lee R et al (2016) The association between limited english proficiency and unplanned emergency department revisit within 72 hours. Ann Emerg Med 68:213–221CrossRef

Sarver J, Baker DW (2000) Effect of language barriers on follow-up appointments after an emergency department visit. J Gen Intern Med 15:256–264CrossRef

Carrasquillo O, Orav EJ, Brennan TA, Burstin HR (1999) Impact of language barriers on patient satisfaction in an emergency department. J Gen Intern Med 14:82–87CrossRef

Feeney T, Cassidy M, Tripodis Y et al (2019) Association of primary language with outcomes after operations typically performed to treat cancer: analysis of a statewide database. Ann Surg Oncol 26:2684–2693CrossRef

10.

Boston Medical Center. Available at: https://www.bmc.org/about-us

11.

VanderWeele TJ. Principles of confounder selection. [Internet].European journal of epidemiology [Internet].; 2019. Available at: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10654-019-00494-6. Accessed March 9, 2019

12.

Harrell Jr FE, Dupont C. Hmisc: Harrell Miscellaneous. 2017. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=Hmisc

13.

Hadley Wickham. 2017. Tidyverse: Easily Install and Load “Tidyverse” Packages. https://CRAN.Rproject.org/package=tidyverse

14.

Warnes GR, Bolker B, Lumley T, Johnson RC. Gmodels: various R Programming tools for model fitting. [Internet]. In: 2018. Available at: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=gmodels

15.

Kassambara A, Kosinski M, Biecek P. survminer: Drawing survival curves using “ggplot2”. [Internet]. In: 2017. Available at: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=survminer

16.

Paredes AZ, Idrees JJ, Beal EW et al (2018) Influence of english proficiency on patient-provider communication and shared decision-making. Surgery 163:1220–1225CrossRef

17.

Karliner LS, Jacobs EA, Chen AH, Mutha S (2007) Do professional interpreters improve clinical care for patients with limited ENGLISH proficiency? A systematic review of the literature. Health Serv Res 42:727–754CrossRef

18.

Inagaki E, Farber A, Kalish J et al (2017) Role of language discordance in complication and readmission rate after infrainguinal bypass. J Vasc Surg 66:1473–1478CrossRef

19.

Grubbs V, Bibbins-Domingo K, Fernandez A et al (2008) Acute myocardial infarction length of stay and hospital mortality are not associated with language preference. J Gen Intern Med 23:190–194CrossRef

20.

Karliner LS, Kim SE, Meltzer DO, Auerbach AD (2010) Influence of language barriers on outcomes of hospital care for general medicine inpatients. J Hosp Med 5:276–282CrossRef

21.

Feeney T, Sanchez SE, Tripodis Y et al (2019) The association of primary language with emergency general surgery outcomes using a statewide database. J Surg Res 244:484–491CrossRef

22.

Clapp B, Jarmillo M, Vigil V et al (2007) Patient comprehension and recall of laparoscopic surgery and outcomes in a non-english speaking population. J Soc Laparoendosc Surg 11(2):242

23.

Mehta SJ (2015) Patient satisfaction reporting and its implications for patient care. AMA J Ethics 17:616–621CrossRef

24.

Petrullo KA, Lamar S, Nwankwo-Otti O et al (2012) The patient satisfaction survey: what does it mean to your bottom line? J Hosp Adm 2(1):8

Title: Provider–patient Language Discordance and Cancer Operations: Outcomes from a Single Center Linked to a State Vital Statistics Registry
Publication date: 01-10-2020
Published in: World Journal of Surgery / Issue 10/2020
Print ISSN: 0364-2313
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2323
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-020-05614-y

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Provider–patient Language Discordance and Cancer Operations: Outcomes from a Single Center Linked to a State Vital Statistics Registry

Abstract

Introduction

Study design

Results

Conclusions

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Introduction

Study design

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 10/2020

Utility of Taking Additional Margins When Performing Breast-Conserving Surgery with Intraoperative Radiation Therapy for Early Breast Cancer

Financial Risk Protection and Hospital Admission for Trauma in Cameroon: An Analysis of the Cameroon National Trauma Registry

Is Extended-Duration (Post-Hospital Discharge) Venous Thromboembolism Chemoprophylaxis Safe and Efficacious in High-Risk Surgery Patients? A Systematic Review

Transition in Frailty State Among Elderly Patients After Vascular Surgery

We Asked the Experts: Providing the Road Map to Uncovering the Pathophysiology of Young-Onset Cancer to Guide Treatment and Preventive Strategies

The Post COVID-19 Surgical Backlog: Now is the Time to Implement Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS)