Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Journal of General Internal Medicine
Published in: Journal of General Internal Medicine 5/2007

01-05-2007 | Original Article

Are Good Intentions Good Enough?: Informed Consent Without Trained Interpreters

Authors: Linda M. Hunt, PhD, Katherine B. de Voogd, MA

Published in: Journal of General Internal Medicine | Issue 5/2007

Login to get access

Abstract

Objective

To examine the informed consent process when trained language interpreters are unavailable.

Background

Ensuring sufficient patient understanding for informed consent is especially challenging for patients with Limited English Proficiency (LEP). While US law requires provision of competent translation for LEP patients, such services are commonly unavailable.

Design and Participants

Qualitative data was collected in 8 prenatal genetics clinics in Texas, including interviews and observations with 16 clinicians, and 30 Latina patients. Using content analysis techniques, we examined whether the basic criteria for informed consent (voluntariness, discussion of alternatives, adequate information, and competence) were evident for each of these patients, contrasting LEP patients with patients not needing an interpreter. We present case examples of difficulties related to each of these criteria, and compare informed consent scores for consultations requiring interpretation and those which did not.

Results

We describe multiple communication problems related to the use of untrained interpreters, or reliance on clinicians’ own limited Spanish. These LEP patients appear to be consistently disadvantaged in each of the criteria we examined, and informed consent scores were notably lower for consultations which occurred across a language barrier.

Conclusions

In the absence of adequate Spanish interpretation, it was uncertain whether these LEP patients were provided the quality and content of information needed to assure that they are genuinely informed. We offer some low-cost practice suggestions that might mitigate these problems, and improve the quality of language interpretation, which is essential to assuring informed choice in health care for LEP patients.
Literature
1.
Laine C, Davidoff F. Patient-centered medicine. A professional evolution. JAMA. 1996;275(2):152–6.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Marini TS. Decisions about amniocentesis by advanced maternal age patients following maternal serum screening may not always correlate clinically with screening results: need for improvement in informed consent process. Am J Med Genet. 2002;109(3):171–5.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Quill TE, Brody H. Physician recommendations and patient autonomy: finding a balance between physician power and patient choice. Ann Intern Med. 1996;125(9):763–9.PubMed
4.
Rapp R. Chromosomes and communication: the discourse of genetic counseling. Med Anthropol Q. 1988;2(2):143–57.CrossRef
5.
Dunne C, Warren C. Lethal autonomy: the malfunction of the informed consent mechanism within the context of prenatal diagnosis of genetic variants. Issues Law Med. 1998;14(2):165–203.PubMed
6.
Emery J. Is informed choice in genetic testing a different breed of informed decision-making? A discussion paper. Health Expect. 2001;4:81–6.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Freda MC, DeVore N, Valentine-Adams N, Bombard A, Merkatz IR. Informed consent for maternal serum alpha-fetoprotein screening in an inner city population: how informed is it? J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 1998;27(1):99–106.PubMedCrossRef
8.
9.
Office for Civil Rights. Policy Guidance - Title VI Prohibition Against National Origin Discrimination as it Affects Persons with Limited English Proficiency. Office for Civil Rights, U S Department of Health and Human Services 2002 [cited 2002 June 19]. Available from: http://​www.​hhs.​gov/​ocr/​lep/​guide.​html.
10.
Fortier JP, Strobel C, Aguilera E. Language barriers to health care: federal and state initiatives, 1990–1995. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 1998;9(suppl):S81–100.
11.
12.
Keers-Sanchez A. Mandatory provision of foreign language interpreters in health care services. J Leg Med. 2003;24(4):557–78.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Perkins J, Vera Y. Legal protections to ensure linguistically appropriate health care. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 1998;9(suppl):S62–80.
14.
US Department of Health and Human Services. Guidance to Federal Financial Assistance Recipients Regarding Title VI Prohibition Against National Origin Discrimination Affecting Limited English Proficient Persons. 8-4-2003. HHS Office for Civil Rights.
15.
16.
Flores G. The impact of medical interpreter services on the quality of health care: a systematic review. Med Care Res Rev. 2005;62(3):255–99.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Betancourt JR, Jacobs EA. Language barriers to informed consent and confidentialitiy: the impact on women’s health. J Am Med Womens Assoc. 2000;55(5):294–5.PubMed
18.
Carter-Pokras O, O’Neill MJ, Cheanvechai V, Menis M, Fan T, Solera A. Providing linguistically appropriate services to persons with limited English proficiency: a needs and resources investigation. Am J Manag Care. 2004;10 Spec No:SP29–36.
19.
John-Baptiste A, Naglie G, Tomlinson G, et al. The effect of English language proficiency on length of stay and in-hospital mortality. J Gen Intern Med. 2004;19(3):221–8.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Riddick S. Improving access for limited English-speaking consumers: a review of strategies in health care settings. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 1998;9(suppl):S40–61.
21.
Roberts CM. Meeting the needs of patients with limited English proficiency. J Med Pract Manage. 2001;17(2):71–5.PubMed
22.
Wilson E, Chen AH, Grumbach K, Wang F, Fernandez A. Effects of limited English proficiency and physician language on health care comprehension. J Gen Intern Med. 2005;20(9):800–6.PubMedCrossRef
23.
Woloshin S, Bickell NA, Schwartz LM, Gany F, Welch HG. Language barriers in medicine in the United States. JAMA. 1995;273(9):724–8.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Woloshin S, Schwartz LM, Katz SJ, Welch HG. Is language a barrier to the use of preventive services? J Gen Intern Med. 1997;12(8):472–7.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Burgess MM. Beyond consent: ethical and social issues in genetic testing. Nat Rev Genet. 2001;2(2):147–51.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Jacobson GM, Veach PM, LeRoy BS. A survey of genetic counselors’ use of informed consent documents for prenatal genetic counseling sessions. J Genet Couns. 2001;10(1):3–24.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Beauchamp TL, Childress JF. Principles of Biomedical Ethics, 4th ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 1994.
28.
Braddock CH III, Edwards KA, Hasenberg NM, Laidley TL, Levinson W. Informed decision making in outpatient practice: time to get back to basics. JAMA. 1999;282(24):2313–20.PubMedCrossRef
29.
Headings VE. Revisiting foundations of autonomy and beneficence in genetic counseling. Genet Couns. 1997;8(4):291–4.PubMed
30.
Barnes DM, Davis AJ, Moran T, Portillo CJ, Koenig BA. Informed consent in a multicultural cancer patient population: implications for nursing practice. Nursing Ethics 1998;5(5):412–23.PubMed
31.
Flores G, Abreu M, Schwartz I, Hill M. The importance of language and culture in pediatric care: case studies from the Latino community. J Pediatr. 2000;137(6):842–8.PubMedCrossRef
32.
McCabe M, Morgan F, Curley H, Begay R, Gohdes DM. The informed consent process in a cross-cultural setting: is the process achieving the intended result? Ethn Dis. 2005;15(2):300–4.PubMed
33.
Simon C, Zyzanski SJ, Eder M, Raiz P, Kodish ED, Siminoff LA. Groups potentially at risk for making poorly informed decisions about entry into clinical trials for childhood cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21(11):2173–8.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Huibers AK, van ’t Spijker A. The autonomy paradox: predictive genetic testing and autonomy: three essential problems. Patient Educ Couns. 1998;35:53–62.PubMedCrossRef
35.
Kuller JA, Laifer SA. Contemporary approaches to prenatal diagnosis. Am Fam Physician. 1995;52(8):2277–6.
36.
Kaufert JM, Putsch RW. Communication through interpreters in healthcare: ethical dilemmas arising from differences in class, culture, language, and power. J Clin Ethics. 1997;8(1):71–87.PubMed
37.
Hunt LM, de Voogd KB. Autonomy, danger, and choice: the moral imperative of an “at risk” pregnancy for a group of low income Latinas in Texas. In: Harthorn BH, Oaks L, eds. Risk, Culture, & Health Inequality: Shifting Perceptions of Danger and Blame. Greenwood Press: 2003:74–103.
38.
Hunt LM, de Voogd KB, Castañeda H. The routine and the traumatic in prenatal genetic diagnosis: does clinical information inform patient decision-making? Patient Educ Couns. 2005;56:302–12.PubMedCrossRef
39.
Browner CH, Preloran HM, Casado MC, Bass HN, Walker AP. Genetic counseling gone awry: miscommunication between prenatal genetic service providers and Mexican-origin clients. Soc Sci Med. 2003;56:1933–46.PubMedCrossRef
40.
Miles M, Huberman AM. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Source Book. 2nd ed. Sage Publications; 1994.
41.
Bernard HR. Research Methods in Anthropology. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishers; 1994.
42.
Dailey JV, Pagnotto MA, Fontana-Bitton S, Brewster SJ. Role of the genetic counselor: an overview. J Perinat Neonatal Nurs. 1995;9(3):32–44.PubMed
43.
Wertz DC, Gregg R. Genetics services in a social, ethical and policy context: a collaboration between consumers and providers. J Med Ethics. 2000;26(4):261–5.PubMedCrossRef
44.
Hunt LM, de Voogd KB. Clinical myths of the cultural “other”: implications for Latino patient care. Acad Med. 2005;80(10):918–24.PubMedCrossRef
45.
Levine RJ. Ethics and Regulation of Clinic Research. New Haven: Yale University Press; 1986.
46.
47.
McQueen MJ. Some ethical and design challenges of screening programs and screening tests. Clin Chim Acta. 2002;315(a):41–8.PubMedCrossRef
48.
Browner CH, Preloran HM, Cox SJ. Ethnicity, bioethics, and prenatal diagnosis: the amniocentesis decisions of Mexican-origin women and their partners. Am J Public Health. 1999;89(11):1658–66.PubMedCrossRef
49.
Kenen RH. The at-risk health status and technology: a diagnostic invitation and the ‘gift’ of knowing. Soc Sci Med. 1996;42(11):1545–53.PubMedCrossRef
50.
Hunt LM, de Voogd KB. Do notions of risk inform patient choice? Lessons from a study of prenatal genetic counseling. Med Anthropol. 2006;25:1–27.CrossRef
51.
Baillie C, Smith J, Hewison J, Mason G. Ultrasound screening for chromosomal abnormality: women’s reactions to false positive results. Br J Health Psychol. 2005;5(4):377–94.CrossRef
52.
53.
54.
Chen A. Doctoring across the language divide. Health Aff. 2006;25(3):808–13.CrossRef
55.
Zabar S, Hanley K, Kachur E, et al. “Oh! She doesn’t speak English!” Assessing resident competence in managing linguistic and cultural barriers. J Gen Intern Med. 2006;21(5):510–3.PubMedCrossRef
56.
Karliner LS, Perez-Stable EJ, Gildengorin G. The language divide. The importance of training in the use of interpreters for outpatient practice. J Gen Intern Med. 2004;19(2):175–83.PubMedCrossRef
57.
Bender DE, Clawson M, Harlan C, Lopez R. Improving access for Latino immigrants: evaluation of language training adapted to the needs of health professionals. J Immigr Health. 2004;6(4):197–209.PubMedCrossRef
58.
Sherrill W, Crew L, Mayo RB, Mayo WF, Rogers BL, Haynes DF. Educational and health services innovation to improve care for rural Hispanic communities in the USA. Rural Remote Health. 2005;5(4):402.PubMed
59.
Ponce NA, Hays RD, Cunningham WE. Linguistic disparities in health care access and health status among older adults. J Gen Intern Med. 2006;21(7):786–91.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Are Good Intentions Good Enough?: Informed Consent Without Trained Interpreters
Authors
Linda M. Hunt, PhD
Katherine B. de Voogd, MA
Publication date
01-05-2007
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine / Issue 5/2007
Print ISSN: 0884-8734
Electronic ISSN: 1525-1497
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-007-0136-1

Other articles of this Issue 5/2007

Journal of General Internal Medicine 5/2007 Go to the issue

Original Article

What are the Essential Elements to Enable Patient Participation in Medical Decision Making?

Perspectives

What Does ‘Respect’ Mean? Exploring the Moral Obligation of Health Professionals to Respect Patients

Case Reports/Case Vignettes

Acute Kawasaki Disease: Not Just for Kids

Original Article

Living Alone, Patient Sex and Mortality After Acute Myocardial Infarction

Original Article

Stress from Uncertainty from Graduation to Retirement—A Population-Based Study of Swiss Physicians

Original Article

Mortality in Peripheral Arterial Disease: A Comparison of Patients Managed by Vascular Specialists and General Practitioners
Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Reserve your place

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin
Prof. Florian Limbourg
Prof. Anoop Chauhan
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

Read more

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Highlights from the ACC 2024 Congress

Year in Review: Pediatric cardiology

Pediatric Cardiology Video

Watch Dr. Anne Marie Valente present the last year's highlights in pediatric and congenital heart disease in the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Pulmonary vascular disease

Cardiopulmonary Comorbidity Video

The last year's highlights in pulmonary vascular disease are presented by Dr. Jane Leopold in this official video from ACC.24.

Year in Review: Valvular heart disease

Valvular Heart Disease Video

Watch Prof. William Zoghbi present the last year's highlights in valvular heart disease from the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Heart Failure Video

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discusses last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.

ACC 2024 Congress Coverage

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Heart Failure Video

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discusses last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.

Watch now

Semaglutide benefits people with type 2 diabetes and obesity-related heart failure

16-04-2024 Type 2 Diabetes News

Incentivised to exercise

11-04-2024 Lifestyle Modifications News

New intervention for STEMI-related cardiogenic shock

10-04-2024 Myocardial Infarction News

» View more highlights on the ACC 2024 congress hub page

Image Credits