T. N. Sparks Joplin2, C. Morocho3, K. J. Lopez2, J. C. Chiang4, D. Ortiz1, A. D. Meagher1 1Indiana University School Of Medicine, Department Of General Surgery Division Of Acute Care Surgery, Indianapolis, IN, USA 2Indiana University School Of Medicine, Department Of General Surgery, Indianapolis, IN, USA 3Indiana University School Of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA 4New York University Langone, Department Of General Surgery, Brooklyn, NY, USA
Introduction:
For Spanish-speaking trauma patients (SSTP), the availability and use of translating tools may change the course of their care. Our objective was to compile the perspectives of SSTP who were hospitalized following their care in the trauma bay.
Methods:
In this prospective qualitative study, adult (>18 years) primary SSTP admitted to the service for >24 hours without traumatic brain injuries or delirium in July-December 2021 at two urban academic level I trauma centers were recruited. Spanish-only in-person semi-structured interviews were conducted through a native speaker. The interview was transcribed in Spanish and translated to English. This was reviewed by a certified medical translator. The interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis.
Results:
Out of 33 patients, 7 met inclusion criteria and were interviewed. The majority were males (n=6) with blunt trauma from Mexico with a high school education. The median age was 35. Only one patient required admission to the intensive care unit.
Most patients demonstrated confusion regarding the concept of autonomy. This was identified by patients agreeing that they had autonomy in their care but sharing contrary information. After clarification, patients from the hospital without in-person translators expressed lessened autonomy and empowerment more often than those with in-person translators. One patient stated, “Yes, the things that they were doing they would ask me… and they were telling me… they were telling me whether I agreed or not.”
Furthermore, the healthcare teams at both institutions decided which patients received a translator. One quote from the hospital lacking in-person translators stated, “No, because I speak English; therefore, I didn’t have a hard time, but I wasn’t offered a translator. I didn’t have a hard time communicating with the doctors.”
Overall, patients felt confused about their traumatic injuries, who comprised their care team, and their care plan. A quote from a patient with an in-person translator stated, “I want to know what’s going to happen because they tell me that possibly … I’m going to be discharged today, but I’m in too much pain for them to discharge me.” All patients reported satisfactory pain control.
Conclusion:
These results suggest that SSTP lack autonomy and empowerment when they do not have an in-person translator. However, a translator’s presence does not help with the understanding of their medical conditions. This data preliminarily shows that medical professionals decide who receives a translator. Further interviews need to be conducted to strengthen the perspective of SSTP’s care.
