Communication board produced no significant change in telephone-interpretation costs (balancing measure)

Description #

As a balancing measure, the project team examined the cost of the existing telephone interpretation service and found no significant difference in associated costs from pre- to post-intervention — i.e., introducing the communication board did not measurably change interpretation-service spending. No cost figures or test statistics are reported (text-only, no supporting table).

"When examining costs as a balancing measure, there were no significant differences in associated costs with the current telephone interpretation service at the surgery center from pre- to post-intervention." (Kiblinger, 2022, p. 22)

Methods Context #

What? #ⓘ

The observable: associated costs of the surgery center's telephone interpretation service, tracked as a balancing measure across the pre- and post-intervention periods.

"When examining costs as a balancing measure, there were no significant differences in associated costs with the current telephone interpretation service at the surgery center from pre- to post-intervention." (Kiblinger, 2022, p. 22)

How? #ⓘ

Pre-post comparison of telephone-interpretation costs at the surgery center as a balancing measure alongside implementation of the A-0014ArtifactA-0014Initial AI draftInteractive pictorial communication board (pediatric surgery center)An interactive pictorial communication board deployed in a pediatric ambulatory surgery center to let bedside nurses convey routine peri-operative nursing tasks to limited-English-proficiency (LEP) patients and caregiver…; the reported result is qualitative ("no significant differences") without disclosed figures or a statistical test.

"A pre-post survey method was utilized to evaluate the implementation of the interactive communication board." (Kiblinger, 2022, p. 20)

Who? #ⓘ

The single large, urban pediatric ambulatory surgery center, whose only prior formal interpreting resource was a telephone interpreting system.

"Prior to project implementation, the only formal interpreting resource utilized at the surgery center was a telephone interpreting system which nurses would often use multiple times during an LEP patient and caregiver’s stay." (Kiblinger, 2022, p. 20)

Other Notes #

Reported as a balancing measure (unintended-consequence check), not a powered cost analysis; the absence of numbers limits interpretation.

Caveats #

• Small, homogenous, single-center nurse sample limits generalizability (Kiblinger board) The project drew on a very small, homogenous nurse sample (15 pre / 14 post of 17 nurses) at a single ambulatory surgery center within one large hospital system, so the effect estimates are imprecise and the findings may not transfer to other practice settings, patient populations, or non-surgical environments.