Errors in Medical Interpretation and Their Potential Clinical Consequences in Pediatric Encounters
Top Cited Papers
- 1 January 2003
- journal article
- Published by American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) in Pediatrics
- Vol. 111 (1) , 6-14
- https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.111.1.6
Abstract
Background. About 19 million people in the United States are limited in English proficiency, but little is known about the frequency and potential clinical consequences of errors in medical interpretation. Objectives. To determine the frequency, categories, and potential clinical consequences of errors in medical interpretation. Methods. During a 7-month period, we audiotaped and transcribed pediatric encounters in a hospital outpatient clinic in which a Spanish interpreter was used. For each transcript, we categorized each error in medical interpretation and determined whether errors had a potential clinical consequence. Results. Thirteen encounters yielded 474 pages of transcripts. Professional hospital interpreters were present for 6 encounters; ad hoc interpreters included nurses, social workers, and an 11-year-old sibling. Three hundred ninety-six interpreter errors were noted, with a mean of 31 per encounter. The most common error type was omission (52%), followed by false fluency (16%), substitution (13%), editorialization (10%), and addition (8%). Sixty-three percent of all errors had potential clinical consequences, with a mean of 19 per encounter. Errors committed by ad hoc interpreters were significantly more likely to be errors of potential clinical consequence than those committed by hospital interpreters (77% vs 53%). Errors of clinical consequence included: 1) omitting questions about drug allergies; 2) omitting instructions on the dose, frequency, and duration of antibiotics and rehydration fluids; 3) adding that hydrocortisone cream must be applied to the entire body, instead of only to facial rash; 4) instructing a mother not to answer personal questions; 5) omitting that a child was already swabbed for a stool culture; and 6) instructing a mother to put amoxicillin in both ears for treatment of otitis media. Conclusions. Errors in medical interpretation are common, averaging 31 per clinical encounter, and omissions are the most frequent type. Most errors have potential clinical consequences, and those committed by ad hoc interpreters are significantly more likely to have potential clinical consequences than those committed by hospital interpreters. Because errors by ad hoc interpreters are more likely to have potential clinical consequences, third-party reimbursement for trained interpreter services should be considered for patients with limited English proficiency.Keywords
This publication has 29 references indexed in Scilit:
- Impact of interpreter services on delivery of health care to limited-English-proficient patientsJournal of General Internal Medicine, 2001
- Racial/ethnic differences in children's access to careAmerican Journal of Public Health, 2000
- Epidemiology of medical errorBMJ, 2000
- Patient comprehension of doctor-patient communication on discharge from the emergency departmentThe Journal of Emergency Medicine, 1997
- Use and effectiveness of interpreters in an emergency departmentPublished by American Medical Association (AMA) ,1996
- Risk Factors for Asthmatic Patients Requiring Intubation. I. Observations in ChildrenJournal of Asthma, 1995
- Language of interview: relevance for research of southwest Hispanics.American Journal of Public Health, 1991
- Language Concordance as a Determinant of Patient Compliance and Emergency Room Use in Patients with AsthmaMedical Care, 1988
- THE BILINGUAL CONSULTATIONThe Lancet, 1988
- Health behavior of elderly Hispanic women: does cultural assimilation make a difference?American Journal of Public Health, 1987