Ask and ye shall not receive: Interpreter-related access barriers reported by Deaf users of American sign language

The study of ableism in population health: a critical review

Over the past three decades, health equity has become a guiding framework for documenting, explaining, and informing the promotion of population health. With these developments, scholars have widened public health's aperture, bringing systems of oppression sharply into focus. Additionally, some researchers in disability and health have advocated for utilizing socially grounded frameworks to investigate the health of disabled people. Yet, naming ableism, much less operationalizing it for the empirical study of health, remains scant. This paper critically reviews the study of ableism as a social determinant of disabled people's health within population health research. First, we provide an orientation to the present state of this literature by looking to the past. We briefly trace a history of traditional approaches to studying disability and health and alternatives that have emerged from critiques of the individualized lens that has dominated this work. Next, we delineate the operation of ableism across social levels. We characterize how ableism has been studied in population health in terms of levels of analysis (intrapersonal, interpersonal, institutional, and structural) and measures of interest. To conclude, we discuss hinderances to and promising avenues toward population health research that advances health equity for disabled people.

Access to Effective Communication Aids and Services among American Sign Language Users across North Carolina: Disparities and Strategies to Address Them

OBJECTIVE

To examine the extent to which communication aids and services used by American Sign Language (ASL) users and their healthcare providers aligns with preferences, satisfaction, and unmet needs; and to elicit from stakeholders strategies to address disparities.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted of ASL users in North Carolina. Respondents completed an online survey presented in ASL and English (N = 189). McNemar's tests were used to compare rates of preferred and actual methods of communication. Logistic regression models explored relationships of accessible communication with dissatisfaction and unmet need. Qualitative interviews explored satisfaction with communication and reflections on what works, what does not, and outcomes (N = 54).

RESULTS

While 45% of respondents used a professional sign language interpreter, 65% of respondents preferred to do so. Accessible communication was associated with lower odds of dissatisfaction with communication (OR = .19, p < .05). Dissatisfaction with communication was associated with greater odds of unmet need for healthcare (OR = 8.95, p < .05). Interview respondents emphasized their preference for on-site interpreters, explaining how video remote interpreting was subject to technical difficulties while writing back-and-forth led to important gaps in understanding.

CONCLUSIONS

While ASL users prefer to use professional, on-site sign language interpreters to communicate with providers, most use some other form of communication instead. Findings emphasize the need for policy strategies to facilitate access to high quality, well-functioning professional interpreter services and to have those services delivered on-site to overcome disparities.

Healthcare Barriers Among Working-Age Persons with Disabilities in Trinidad

Even though easily accessible and cost-effective healthcare is a fundamental human right, many persons with disabilities experience healthcare barriers and poor health outcomes. We explore the healthcare barriers among working-age persons with disabilities in Trinidad using a qualitative descriptive approach. Semi-structured interviews with 26 participants reveal barriers at the personal, healthcare facility, and societal levels. The findings indicate the need for a nation-wide integrated digitalized system and increased intersectoral collaborations to support adequate healthcare among persons with disabilities in Trinidad. Increased consultation with persons with disabilities and transformation of the disability discourses within the healthcare system and at the national level are also recommended as part of the humanisation of their care.

"They're Not Willing To Accommodate Deaf patients": Communication Experiences of Deaf American Sign Language Users in the Emergency Department

Deaf people who use American Sign Language (ASL) are more likely to use the emergency department (ED) than their hearing English-speaking counterparts and are also at higher risk of receiving inaccessible communication. The purpose of this study is to explore the ED communication experience of Deaf patients. A descriptive qualitative study was performed by interviewing 11 Deaf people who had used the ED in the past 2 years. Applying a descriptive thematic analysis, we developed five themes: (1) requesting communication access can be stressful, frustrating, and time-consuming; (2) perspectives and experiences with Video Remote Interpreting (VRI); (3) expectations, benefits, and drawbacks of using on-site ASL interpreters; (4) written and oral communication provides insufficient information to Deaf patients; and (5) ED staff and providers lack cultural sensitivity and awareness towards Deaf patients. Findings are discussed with respect to medical and interpreting ethics to improve ED communication for Deaf patients.

Equity in the Provision of Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support

Diabetes self-management education and support (DSMES) interventions must be accessible to all people with diabetes. To address equity in the delivery of DSMES, interventions should consider the unique needs of various populations. This article outlines the needs of a wide range of populations, including people with diabetes who are racially or ethnically diverse; have limited English proficiency or literacy; are deaf or hard of hearing; are blind or have low vision; are neurodiverse; live with learning disabilities or intellectual or developmental disabilities; have dementia or cognitive impairment; or are of sexual and/or gender minority. The authors discuss how best to tailor DSMES to meet the needs of these diverse groups.

Comparison of Access to Primary Care Medical and Dental Appointments Between Simulated Patients Who Were Deaf and Patients Who Could Hear

Importance

Primary medical and dental clinics may accept fewer people who are deaf as patients than persons who can hear, and clinics may deny requests by patients who are deaf for American Sign Language (ASL) interpretation at appointments when necessary, creating diminished access to primary medical and dental care.

Objective

To compare the rate at which patients who are deaf are offered primary care medical or dental appointments with the rate at which appointments are offered to patients who can hear in a real-world context.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cross-sectional study used a simulated patient (SP) call audit method. Simulated patients (4 who could hear and 4 who were deaf) followed a call script in which an adult sought to establish care, requesting new patient appointments from a statewide stratified random sample of clinicians listed in the Idaho Medical and Dental Associations member databases at 445 clinics (334 primary care and 111 general dentistry) throughout Idaho. Simulated patients who were deaf also requested interpreting services at the appointment. Calls were made between June 7 and December 6, 2018. Data analysis was conducted from December 2019 to April 2020.

Exposures

Simulated patients who were deaf or could hear called primary care medical or dental clinics from the sampling frame and requested an appointment, supplying the same basic information. In addition, SPs who were deaf requested that an ASL interpreter be provided by the clinic for the appointment.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Rates of new appointments offered and, for SPs who were deaf, whether ASL interpreter services were confirmed for the appointment.

Results

Two male and 2 female SPs who could hear were successful on 210 occasions (64.4%) when requesting a new patient appointment compared with 2 male and 2 female SPs who were deaf who were successful on 161 occasions (49.1%) (P < .001). Simulated patients who could hear were nearly 2 times more likely to secure appointments than were SPs who were deaf (adjusted odds ratio, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.27-2.79). For SPs who were deaf, 80 unsuccessful appointment requests (48.2%) were associated with a request for interpretation.

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings suggest that in a statewide representative sample, access to primary medical and dental care for patients who are deaf is significantly reduced. Patients who are deaf may not receive an appointment if they request interpreter services, even when such services are required to provide effective communication.