Initial consultation length did not differ between direct-Spanish and interpreter-services arms (37 vs 33 min)
Source
Seible (2021). The Influence of Patient-Provider Language Concordance in Cancer Care: Results of the Hispanic Outcomes by Language Approach (HOLA) Randomized Trial. International Journal of Radiation Oncology.
Description #
The duration of the initial consultation did not differ significantly between the two communication modalities: interpreter-services consultations averaged 33 minutes versus 37 minutes for direct-Spanish consultations (P = .33). Thus the satisfaction and communication-content differences arose without a measurable difference in visit length.
"When considering the content of the initial patient consultation, we found no significant differences in consultation length between study arms, with the average consultation of the interpreter-services arm lasting 33 minutes compared with the direct-Spanish arm lasting 37 minutes (P = .33)." (Seible, 2021, p. 858)
Methods Context #
What? #ⓘ
The observable: average length (minutes) of the initial patient-physician consultation, compared between study arms.
"we found no significant differences in consultation length between study arms" (Seible, 2021, p. 858)
How? #ⓘ
Consultation duration derived from the recorded/transcribed initial-consultation encounters in the content-analysis subset; compared between arms (P = .33).
"For the final 43 enrolled patients, we obtained audio recordings of the initial consultation to enable analysis of communication content." (Seible, 2021, p. 858)
Who? #ⓘ
The content-analysis subset of initial consultations: interpreter-services n = 19 and direct-Spanish n = 24, within the broader RCT of 83 Spanish-speaking cancer patients.
"Interpreter services (n = 19) ... Direct Spanish (n = 24)" (Seible, 2021, p. 863)
Other Notes #
Relevant to delivery-cost/effort framing: language-concordant care here delivered higher satisfaction without lengthening the visit.