Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2006 Jul;21(7):683-8.
doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2006.00492.x.

Effect of awareness of language law on language access in the health care setting

Affiliations

Effect of awareness of language law on language access in the health care setting

Vanessa Grubbs et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2006 Jul.

Abstract

Background: Federal law obligates health care providers receiving federal funding to ensure language access to limited English-proficient (LEP) individuals who cannot communicate with their provider.

Objective: To determine whether LEP individual awareness of this law improved language access through interpreter utilization.

Design, setting, and participants: In June 2003, a telephone survey of 1,200 Californians was conducted in 11 non-English languages.

Measurements: The survey included items on English proficiency, awareness of language law, health care utilization, and communication methods. Language access was defined as having a provider who speaks the individual's language (language-concordant) or utilizing an interpreter.

Results: There were 1,000 LEP participants, of whom 371 (37%) were aware of the language law. Four hundred and ninety-one (49%) of LEP participants had a language-concordant provider. Of the remaining 509 LEP participants without a language-concordant provider, 111 (22%) reported interpreter utilization in the health care setting. After controlling for age, gender, education, income, insurance status, years in the United States, health care utilization, and level of English proficiency, awareness of law was not associated with interpreter utilization (odds ratio [OR] 0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.38, 1.17; P=.16), but was associated with having a language-concordant provider (OR 1.64; 95% CI 1.19, 2.26; P=.003).

Conclusion: Awareness of language law is not sufficient to resolve language barriers for LEP individuals. Provider and organization level barriers to language access must be addressed.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Method of communication by ability to speak English. (Because of rounding, totals may not equal 100%. Only those asked about communicating with provider included, n = 897).

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Facione NC. Breast cancer screening in relation to access to health services. Oncol Nurs Forum. 1999;26:689–96. - PubMed
    1. Fiscella K, Franks P, Doescher MP, Saver BG. Disparities in health care by race, ethnicity, and language among the insured: findings from a national sample. Med Care. 2002;40:52–9. - PubMed
    1. Flores G, Abreu M, Olivar MA, Kastner B. Access barriers to health care for Latino children. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 1998;152:1119–25. - PubMed
    1. Harlan LC, Bernstein AB, Kessler LG. Cervical cancer screening: who is not screened and why? Am J Public Health. 1991;81:885–91. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hu DJ, Covell RM. Health care usage by hispanic outpatients as function of primary language. West J Med. 1986;144:490–3. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types