Publications

BACKGROUND

Twenty-five million people in the United States have limited English proficiency (LEP); this growing and aging population experiences worse outcomes when hospitalized. Federal requirements that hospitals provide language access services are very challenging to implement in the fast-paced, 24-hour hospital environment.

OBJECTIVE

To determine if increasing access to professional interpreters improves hospital outcomes for older patients with LEP.

DESIGN

Natural experiment on a medicine floor of an academic hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients age 50 years or above discharged between January 15, 2007 and January 15, 2010.

EXPOSURE

Dual-handset interpreter telephone at every bedside July 15, 2008 to Mar 14, 2009.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Thirty-day readmission, length of stay, estimated hospital expenditures.

RESULTS

Of 8077 discharges, 1963 were for LEP, and 6114 for English proficient patients. 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. This improved readmission outcome for the LEP group was not maintained during the subsequent postintervention period when the telephones became less accessible. There was no significant intervention impact on length of stay in either unadjusted or adjusted analyses. 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.

CONCLUSIONS

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

PURPOSE

To establish if triple-phase arterial imaging improves the detection of arterial phase hyperintense lesions based on arterial phase capture, motion artifact degradation, and lesion enhancement when compared to single-phase imaging.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients at risk for hepatocellular carcinoma were imaged at 3.0T. Seventy-three consecutive patients with a standard single-phase MRI and eighty-five consecutive patients were imaged using extracellular contrast with triple arterial phase MRI using three sequential accelerated acquisitions of 8 s. Arterial phase capture and image quality were qualitatively categorized. Forty single-phase and forty-four triple-phase studies contained arterially enhancing lesions > 1 cm with washout appearance. The contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) of the lesions was calculated. We compared the differences in means with Student t-tests and those in arterial phase capture with a Chi squared test with Yates correction.

RESULTS

The triple-phase acquisitions captured the early or late arterial phases more frequently than did the single-phase acquisition (99% vs 86%; P value = 0.006). Triple-phase also provided greater number of patients with early or late arterial phase imaging without motion artifact (92% vs 79%, P-value = 0.05). The lesion analysis revealed increased maximum CNR in the triple-phase imaging (704.4) vs. single-phase imaging (517.2), P-value < 0.001.

CONCLUSION

Triple-phase acquisition provides more robust arterial phase imaging for hepatic lesions, with increased lesion CNR, compared to standard single-phase arterial phase imaging.

Lack of timely access to specialty care is a significant problem among disadvantaged populations, such as those served by the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services. In 2012 the department implemented an electronic system for the provision of specialty care called the eConsult system, in which all requests from primary care providers for specialty assistance were reviewed by specialists. In many cases, the specialist can address the primary care provider's question via an electronic dialogue, thereby eliminating the need for the patient to see a specialist in person. We observed rapid growth in the use of eConsult: By 2015 the system was in use by over 3,000 primary care providers, and 12,082 consultations were taking place per month, compared to 86 in the third quarter of 2012. The median time to an electronic response from a specialist was one day, and 25 percent of eConsults were resolved without a specialist visit. Three to four years after implementation, the median time to a specialist appointment decreased significantly, while the volume of visits remained stable. eConsult systems are a promising and sustainable intervention that could improve access to specialist care for underserved patients.