Convenient Access to Professional Interpreters in the Hospital Decreases Readmission Rates and Estimated Hospital Expenditures for Patients With Limited English Proficiency

Abstract results

Each result the abstract reports — is it captured as evidence?

• Of 8077 discharges, 1963 were for LEP, and 6114 for English proficient patients.

  Covered Promote Not a result

• There was a significant decrease in observed 30-day readmission rates for the LEP group during the 8-month intervention period compared with 18 months preintervention (17.8% vs. 13.4%); at the same time English proficient readmission rates increased (16.7% vs. 19.7%); results remained significant in adjusted analyses.

  suggested · 27% Providing a dual-handset interpreter telephone at every LEP bedside was associated with a significant reduction in 30-day readmiss

  Covered Promote Not a result

• This improved readmission outcome for the LEP group was not maintained during the subsequent postintervention period when the telephones became less accessible.

  suggested · 20% Providing a dual-handset interpreter telephone at every LEP bedside was associated with a significant reduction in 30-day readmiss

  Covered Promote Not a result

• There was no significant intervention impact on length of stay in either unadjusted or adjusted analyses.

  suggested · 23% The bedside interpreter telephone intervention had no significant impact on length of stay (LOS) for LEP patients. Unadjusted medi

  Covered Promote Not a result

• After accounting for interpreter services costs, the estimated 119 readmissions averted during the intervention period were associated with estimated monthly hospital expenditure savings of $161,404.

  suggested · 19% The reduced LEP readmission rate during the intervention translated into substantial estimated hospital expenditure savings. Holdi

  Covered Promote Not a result

• Comprehensive language access represents an important, high value service that all medical centers should provide to achieve equitable, quality healthcare for vulnerable LEP populations.

  Covered Promote Not a result

Tables & figures

Map each object to the evidence it grounds (one object can ground several), add anything missed, or flag a gap.

• Figure 1 — Average monthly number of interpreted encoun-

  p5
  • Averted LEP readmissions during intervention yielded estimated $161,404 monthly hospital savings
  • Bedside interpreter telephone access had no significant effect on length of stay
  • Bedside interpreter telephone access lowered LEP 30-day readmission during intervention (OR 0.64)
  Add evidence Flag gap Nothing to capture

• Table 1 — Characteristics of 8077 Discharges for Patients 50 Years Old or Above Discharged From the Medicine Floor of an

  p4
  • Averted LEP readmissions during intervention yielded estimated $161,404 monthly hospital savings
  • Bedside interpreter telephone access had no significant effect on length of stay
  • Bedside interpreter telephone access lowered LEP 30-day readmission during intervention (OR 0.64)
  Add evidence Flag gap Nothing to capture

• Table 2 — Utilization of Professional Telephone Interpreters by

  p6
  • Averted LEP readmissions during intervention yielded estimated $161,404 monthly hospital savings
  • Bedside interpreter telephone access had no significant effect on length of stay
  • Bedside interpreter telephone access lowered LEP 30-day readmission during intervention (OR 0.64)
  Add evidence Flag gap Nothing to capture
• 

  Table 3 — Observed Hospital Outcomes for Length of Stay and

  p6
  • Averted LEP readmissions during intervention yielded estimated $161,404 monthly hospital savings
  • Bedside interpreter telephone access had no significant effect on length of stay
  • Bedside interpreter telephone access lowered LEP 30-day readmission during intervention (OR 0.64)
  Add evidence Flag gap Nothing to capture
• 

  Table 4 — Adjusted Results for Readmission and Length of Stay

  p6
  • Averted LEP readmissions during intervention yielded estimated $161,404 monthly hospital savings
  • Bedside interpreter telephone access had no significant effect on length of stay
  • Bedside interpreter telephone access lowered LEP 30-day readmission during intervention (OR 0.64)
  Add evidence Flag gap Nothing to capture