LEP Patient Engagement. T EAM STEPPS 05.2 Mod 1 05.2 Page 2 TeamSTEPPS Why engage patients with...

14
LEP Patient Engagement

Transcript of LEP Patient Engagement. T EAM STEPPS 05.2 Mod 1 05.2 Page 2 TeamSTEPPS Why engage patients with...

Page 1: LEP Patient Engagement. T EAM STEPPS 05.2 Mod 1 05.2 Page 2 TeamSTEPPS Why engage patients with limited English proficiency? LEP patients = 8.6% of U.S.

LEP Patient Engagement

Page 2: LEP Patient Engagement. T EAM STEPPS 05.2 Mod 1 05.2 Page 2 TeamSTEPPS Why engage patients with limited English proficiency? LEP patients = 8.6% of U.S.

TEAMSTEPPS 05.2Mod 1 05.2 Page 2Mod 1 05.2 Page 2

TeamSTEPPS

Why engage patients with limited English proficiency?

LEP patients = 8.6% of U.S. population

Patient safety events more severe and more often due to communication errors (Divi et al. 2006, Flores 2005)

LEP patients are safer and have fewer readmissions with professional interpreters (Flores et al. 2003, 2008, Linholm et al. 2012)

Page 3: LEP Patient Engagement. T EAM STEPPS 05.2 Mod 1 05.2 Page 2 TeamSTEPPS Why engage patients with limited English proficiency? LEP patients = 8.6% of U.S.

TEAMSTEPPS 05.2Mod 1 05.2 Page 3Mod 1 05.2 Page 3

TeamSTEPPS

Abt Associates

One misunderstood word, “intoxicado” -> quadriplegic teen, $71 million settlement

Heard during our initial research:

“In French, estomac is the stomach, but in Creole, lestomak mwen means, ‘my chest’. Without an interpreter present, a French-speaking provider could incorrectly think a [Haitian] patient was experiencing stomach pain, not chest pain. This is a potentially life-threatening error”

— Interpreter

Misunderstandings are common and can be serious

Page 4: LEP Patient Engagement. T EAM STEPPS 05.2 Mod 1 05.2 Page 2 TeamSTEPPS Why engage patients with limited English proficiency? LEP patients = 8.6% of U.S.

TEAMSTEPPS 05.2Mod 1 05.2 Page 4Mod 1 05.2 Page 4

TeamSTEPPS

Yet interpreters are rarely integrated into the patient safety team (Diamond et al. 2009; Ring et al. 2010; Betancourt et al., forthcoming)

Often not called at all because of delaysMaybe somebody else requires that bed. So that’s when we do our discharge. I would like to see the doctor’s face if I go over there, and say, ‘you know, I really can’t discharge this patient because he doesn’t really understand anything’’--Nurse

Or ignored when they are presentI’ve seen interpreters try, for example, to intervene when a provider insists on speaking a language they’re not fluent in. And there’s a big power struggle and the interpreters feel intimidated. But it’d be nice for them to be able to really recognize situations that are really critical, to be able to call time outs. — Interpreter Services leader

Page 5: LEP Patient Engagement. T EAM STEPPS 05.2 Mod 1 05.2 Page 2 TeamSTEPPS Why engage patients with limited English proficiency? LEP patients = 8.6% of U.S.

TEAMSTEPPS 05.2Mod 1 05.2 Page 5Mod 1 05.2 Page 5

TeamSTEPPS

High-Risk Settings and Situations

Consider starting here: ED Labor and Delivery Surgery Transitions in care, including intake and discharge Medication reconciliation

Page 6: LEP Patient Engagement. T EAM STEPPS 05.2 Mod 1 05.2 Page 2 TeamSTEPPS Why engage patients with limited English proficiency? LEP patients = 8.6% of U.S.

TEAMSTEPPS 05.2Mod 1 05.2 Page 6Mod 1 05.2 Page 6

TeamSTEPPS

How the LEP module can help

1.5 hour staff training module and 4-hour train-the-trainer program so unit staff and interpreters can: Understand the risks to LEP patients Assemble the right team (call an interpreter!) Identify and raise patient communication issues

Also includes a guide for hospital leaders To identify/ implement needed system changes

ahead of training

Page 7: LEP Patient Engagement. T EAM STEPPS 05.2 Mod 1 05.2 Page 2 TeamSTEPPS Why engage patients with limited English proficiency? LEP patients = 8.6% of U.S.

TEAMSTEPPS 05.2Mod 1 05.2 Page 7Mod 1 05.2 Page 7

TeamSTEPPS

Module preview: process map

Page 8: LEP Patient Engagement. T EAM STEPPS 05.2 Mod 1 05.2 Page 2 TeamSTEPPS Why engage patients with limited English proficiency? LEP patients = 8.6% of U.S.

TEAMSTEPPS 05.2Mod 1 05.2 Page 8Mod 1 05.2 Page 8

TeamSTEPPS

Tools

Assemble the team CUS Two Challenge Rule Brief Psychological Safety Check-Back Teach Back

Page 9: LEP Patient Engagement. T EAM STEPPS 05.2 Mod 1 05.2 Page 2 TeamSTEPPS Why engage patients with limited English proficiency? LEP patients = 8.6% of U.S.

TEAMSTEPPS 05.2Mod 1 05.2 Page 9Mod 1 05.2 Page 9

TeamSTEPPS

Stop the Line: CUS

(insert video clip of CUS here)

Page 10: LEP Patient Engagement. T EAM STEPPS 05.2 Mod 1 05.2 Page 2 TeamSTEPPS Why engage patients with limited English proficiency? LEP patients = 8.6% of U.S.

TEAMSTEPPS 05.2Mod 1 05.2 Page 10Mod 1 05.2 Page 10

TeamSTEPPS

Field-test findings

Module can be implemented various ways in various settings TeamSTEPPS/non-TeamSTEPPS hospital Hospital units (ED, L&D, OB), or primary care Stand-alone or part of overall TeamSTEPPS

Page 11: LEP Patient Engagement. T EAM STEPPS 05.2 Mod 1 05.2 Page 2 TeamSTEPPS Why engage patients with limited English proficiency? LEP patients = 8.6% of U.S.

TEAMSTEPPS 05.2Mod 1 05.2 Page 11Mod 1 05.2 Page 11

TeamSTEPPS

Field test findings

Page 12: LEP Patient Engagement. T EAM STEPPS 05.2 Mod 1 05.2 Page 2 TeamSTEPPS Why engage patients with limited English proficiency? LEP patients = 8.6% of U.S.

TEAMSTEPPS 05.2Mod 1 05.2 Page 12Mod 1 05.2 Page 12

TeamSTEPPS

Results

Qualitative results: Clinical staff more aware of need to call interpreter Interpreters more empowered to raise and address communication

issues with clinical team

Quantitative results: Hospital 1: pre-test convinced leadership no post-test

Hospital 2: High satisfaction, increase in knowledge, R/E/L data quality issues interpreter use data unusable

Hospital 3: High satisfaction, increase in knowledge scores, R/E/L data quality issues interpreter use data unusable

Page 13: LEP Patient Engagement. T EAM STEPPS 05.2 Mod 1 05.2 Page 2 TeamSTEPPS Why engage patients with limited English proficiency? LEP patients = 8.6% of U.S.

TEAMSTEPPS 05.2Mod 1 05.2 Page 13Mod 1 05.2 Page 13

TeamSTEPPS

Conclusions

Module can be implemented in a variety of settings TeamSTEPPS/non-TeamSTEPPS Hospital/ primary care clinic

Catalyst for change R/E/L data Collection/use still a barrier to formal

evaluation

Page 14: LEP Patient Engagement. T EAM STEPPS 05.2 Mod 1 05.2 Page 2 TeamSTEPPS Why engage patients with limited English proficiency? LEP patients = 8.6% of U.S.

TEAMSTEPPS 05.2Mod 1 05.2 Page 14Mod 1 05.2 Page 14

TeamSTEPPS

Next steps

Module available early Fall Sign up today for a copy