Discharge Instructions for Spanish-Speaking Patients: A House Staff Perspective
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
\n Background\nUC San Diego Health has a diverse patient population with a large portion of its hospitalized patients speaking Spanish as their primary language. Several measures have been taken to overcome barriers to quality healthcare in this subgroup of patients, including easy access to medical translators and post-discharge follow-up efforts; however, there may be room for further improvement. One barrier that remains is providing written hospital discharge instructions for Spanish-speaking patients in their native language. The purpose of this study was to measure the overall perspective of physicians practicing hospital medicine at UC San Diego regarding our ability to effectively provide discharge instructions to Spanish-speaking patients that maximize positive health outcomes after hospitalization. \n Methods\nA seven-question survey was designed to measure the perspectives of hospital staff, including resident and attending physicians, practicing hospital medicine within the UC San Diego healthcare system. In March 2023, the survey was distributed electronically to all resident physicians enrolled in and select administrative attending physicians involved in the UC San Diego internal medicine residency program. Participants were given a two-week period to complete the survey. All participation was voluntary, and responses were collected anonymously. The responses were subsequently analyzed using descriptive statistics. \n Results\nThirty-five participants completed the survey in its entirety, representing approximately a quarter of the internal medicine residency program. Data analysis revealed that 74% of participants “always” or “often” write discharge instructions for Spanish-speaking patients in English. Furthermore, a majority 91% of participants felt that providing instructions in English to Spanish-speaking patients “always” or “often” represents a barrier to care. 100% of participants indicated that, at a minimum, they would “sometimes” use pre-written translator-approved Spanish phrases if provided, with over half of participants replying that they would “always” use these instructions. Lastly, a majority of participants felt that the use of these phrases in Spanish would improve overall follow-up and medication adherence, as well as reduce readmission rates. \n Conclusions\nConsidering these data, it appears that the current method of providing discharge instructions written in English to Spanish-speaking patients is considered a barrier to adequate healthcare at UC San Diego hospitals by internal medicine house staff. Though unlikely to completely resolve the problem, using translator-approved Spanish phrases in discharge instructions may improve follow-up and medication use after discharge, and reduce readmission rates among Spanish-speaking patients. These data will help support current efforts to provide Spanish discharge instructions for Spanish-speaking patients.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,008 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».