TY - JOUR
T1 - “I'm sorry, my English not very good”
T2 - Tracking differences between Language-Barrier and Non-Language-Barrier emergency ambulance calls for Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest
AU - Perera, Nirukshi
AU - Birnie, Tanya
AU - Ngo, Hanh
AU - Ball, Stephen
AU - Whiteside, Austin
AU - Bray, Janet
AU - Bailey, Paul
AU - Finn, Judith
N1 - Funding Information:
We wish to acknowledge Sheryl Gallant and Alani Morgan at the Prehospital, Resuscitation and Emergency Care Research Unit, Curtin University, for supporting this project via maintenance of the St John WA OHCA database and retrieval of call audio data used in the analyses. The study was supported by the NHMRC Investigator grant (1174838) entitled “Improving outcomes after cardiac arrest: strengthening the chain of survival”. JB is funded by a Heart Foundation Fellowship (#104751).
Funding Information:
Austin Whiteside and Paul Bailey are employed by St John Western Australia (SJ-WA); Judith Finn and Stephen Ball hold adjunct appointments with SJ-WA and Judith Finn receives research project funding from SJ-WA. Janet Bray, Paul Bailey and Judith Finn are Chief Investigators on the NHMRC-funded Prehospital and Emergency Care Centre of Research Excellence.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 Elsevier B.V.
PY - 2021/12
Y1 - 2021/12
N2 - Background: One-fifth of Australia's population do not speak English at home. International studies have found emergency calls with language barriers (LB) result in longer delays to out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) recognition, and lower rates of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and survival. This study compared LB and non-LB OHCA call time intervals in an Australian emergency medical service (EMS). Methods: The retrospective cohort study measured time intervals from call commencement for primary outcomes: (1) address acquisition; (2) OHCA recognition; (3) CPR initiation; (4) telecommunicator CPR (t-CPR) compressions, in all identified LB calls and a 2:1 random sample of non-LB EMS calls from January to June 2019. Results for time intervals #1, 2, and 4 were benchmarked against the American Heart Association's (AHA) t-CPR minimal acceptable time standards. Patient survival outcomes were compared. Results: We identified 50 (14%) LB calls from a cohort of 353 calls. LB calls took longer than non-LB calls (n=100) for: address acquisition (median 29 vs 14 secs, p<0.001), OHCA recognition (103 vs 85 secs, p=0.02), and CPR initiation (206 vs 164 secs, p=0.01), but not for t-CPR compressions (292 vs 248 secs, p=0.12). Rates of OHCA recognition and 30-day-survival did not differ but smaller proportions of LB calls met the AHA standards. Conclusion: Time delays found in LB calls point to phases of the call which need further qualitative investigation to understand how to improve communication. Overall, training call-takers for LB calls may assist caller understanding and cooperation during OHCAs.
AB - Background: One-fifth of Australia's population do not speak English at home. International studies have found emergency calls with language barriers (LB) result in longer delays to out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) recognition, and lower rates of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and survival. This study compared LB and non-LB OHCA call time intervals in an Australian emergency medical service (EMS). Methods: The retrospective cohort study measured time intervals from call commencement for primary outcomes: (1) address acquisition; (2) OHCA recognition; (3) CPR initiation; (4) telecommunicator CPR (t-CPR) compressions, in all identified LB calls and a 2:1 random sample of non-LB EMS calls from January to June 2019. Results for time intervals #1, 2, and 4 were benchmarked against the American Heart Association's (AHA) t-CPR minimal acceptable time standards. Patient survival outcomes were compared. Results: We identified 50 (14%) LB calls from a cohort of 353 calls. LB calls took longer than non-LB calls (n=100) for: address acquisition (median 29 vs 14 secs, p<0.001), OHCA recognition (103 vs 85 secs, p=0.02), and CPR initiation (206 vs 164 secs, p=0.01), but not for t-CPR compressions (292 vs 248 secs, p=0.12). Rates of OHCA recognition and 30-day-survival did not differ but smaller proportions of LB calls met the AHA standards. Conclusion: Time delays found in LB calls point to phases of the call which need further qualitative investigation to understand how to improve communication. Overall, training call-takers for LB calls may assist caller understanding and cooperation during OHCAs.
KW - Ambulance dispatch
KW - Emergency calls
KW - Emergency Medical Dispatch
KW - Emergency medical service
KW - Health communication
KW - Language barrier
KW - Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85118868897&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2021.10.035
DO - 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2021.10.035
M3 - Article
C2 - 34718082
AN - SCOPUS:85118868897
SN - 0300-9572
VL - 169
SP - 105
EP - 112
JO - Resuscitation
JF - Resuscitation
ER -