Teaching foundational language equity concepts in the pre-clinical curriculum.

BACKGROUND: Despite the prevalence of non-English languages in the US population, existing medical training to teach communication with linguistically diverse communities is limited to electives or solely focuses on medical interpreting. Language-appropriate communication skills are seldom comprehensively integrated in medical education. This study describes the development and evaluation of an intervention to teach foundational language equity concepts. METHODS: The authors implemented a pre-clinical language equity course at three medical school campuses between August 2020 and March 2022. Sessions focused on the impact of language in health, physician language proficiency standards, and working with medical interpreters. The study sought to (1) understand students' language skills and prior clinical experiences with patients with non-English language preference and (2) evaluate the curriculum's impact. Students self-reported their language skills and experiences as part of a voluntary pre-questionnaire. Pre and post-questionnaires evaluated knowledge, attitudes, and intent to apply language equity concepts. Descriptive statistics and chi-squared tests were used to examine trends; themes were identified from free-text responses. RESULTS: Overall, 301 students completed the course, 252 (83%) completed at least one questionnaire; for each session, between 35% and 46% of learners completed both pre and post-questionnaires. Three quarters (189/252) reported non-English languages. Over half (138/252) reported previous non-English language patient care, and 28% (62/224) had served as ad hoc (untrained) interpreters. Only two students (< 1%) had ever been assessed for medical language abilities. Students demonstrated improved post-course language equity knowledge, strategies for interpreter-mediated encounters, and likelihood to report a plan for language skills assessment (all p < .001). Most plans were multifaceted (61%, 38/62), involving goals like completing a language course, taking a proficiency exam, openly discussing skills and uncertainties with team members, and increasing professional interpreter utilization. CONCLUSIONS: A longitudinal language equity curriculum can be feasibly integrated in pre-clinical education, highlight the linguistic diversity of the student body, and serve as a first step in ensuring that all students have a strong language equity foundation prior to clinical rotations. Future steps include evaluating the intervention's potential long-term effects on professional interpreter utilization, student clinical performance, and institutional culture that promotes multilingualism.

Current State and Proposal of Best Practices of Standardized Patients for Spanish-Language Objective Structured Clinical Encounters in US Medical Schools.

INTRODUCTION: Medical Spanish programs commonly engage Spanish-speaking standardized patients (SPs) for communication skills assessment, yet no studies address SP recruitment, selection, or training. METHODS: We sent questionnaires to medical Spanish faculty at 20 US medical schools to gauge their practices in recruiting and selecting Spanish-language SPs. We invited faculty to distribute a separate questionnaire to Spanish-language SPs to gather SP language abilities, training, and experience. We analyzed data using descriptive statistics and qualitative content analysis. When available, we reviewed SP video encounters to formally assess participating SPs' linguistic performance using the SP Oral Language Observation Matrix, a rating tool adapted from the Physician Oral Language Observation Matrix to assess oral medical Spanish proficiency. RESULTS: Eighty percent of faculty (16/20) responded. Standardized patient recruitment sources included institutional English-language SPs, Hispanic student groups and professional organizations, communities, and language professionals. Faculty-reported strategies to determine language readiness included interviewing SP candidates in Spanish and asking them to self-rate language skills using a validated scale. Fifteen SPs (54%, 15/28) from 5 schools responded to the SP questionnaire, and one third (5/15) reported that their Spanish was not assessed before being selected as an SP. In addition, one third (5/15) did not receive any initial training before performing a medical Spanish case. Raters assessed 11 different SPs using the SP Oral Language Observation Matrix, and 6 were rated as linguistically "ready" for the SP role. CONCLUSIONS: Current approaches to recruitment, training, and language assessment of SPs vary. We propose strategies to ensure that medical Spanish encounters authentically reflect Spanish-speaking patients.

Validity Evidence for the Physician Oral Language Observation Matrix as a Measure of Medical Spanish Proficiency.

BACKGROUND: The lack of a standardized language assessment process for medical students and physicians communicating in a non-English language threatens healthcare quality and safety. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the validity of a new rating tool, the Physician Oral Language Observation Matrix (POLOM)™, in assessing medical students' oral communication with Spanish-speaking standardized patients (SPs). DESIGN: POLOM scores were compared to measures of student medical Spanish proficiency to examine convergent validity and to measures of clinical performance to examine concurrent/criterion validity. PARTICIPANTS: Forty-two students at two schools completed SP encounters between January 2021 and April 2022, and POLOM raters scored the videorecorded performances between January and June 2022. MAIN MEASURES: Two approaches to generating POLOM total scores were investigated: rater average and strict consensus. Convergent validity was examined via the POLOM's correlations with (1) the phone-based Clinician Cultural and Linguistic Assessment (CCLA) and (2) the self-rated Interagency Language Roundtable scale for healthcare (ILR-H). Concurrent/criterion validity was examined via correlations with (1) the Comunicación y Habilidades Interpersonales (CAI) scale, (2) a checklist completed by the SP, and (3) a faculty rating of the student's post-encounter clinical note. Pearson's correlations of r ≥ 0.5 and r ≥ 0.2 were considered evidence of convergent validity and concurrent/criterion validity, respectively. KEY RESULTS: Both rater average and strict consensus POLOM scores were strongly correlated with ILR-H (r = 0.72) and CCLA (r ≥ 0.60), providing evidence of convergent validity. The POLOM was substantially correlated with the CAI (r ≥ 0.29), the SP Checklist (r = 0.32), and the faculty scoring of the student's clinical note (r ≥ 0.24), providing concurrent/criterion validity evidence. CONCLUSIONS: The POLOM has demonstrated evidence of convergent and concurrent/criterion validity as a measure of medical students' Spanish proficiency during SP encounters. Additional research is needed to evaluate how the POLOM can be implemented with resident and practicing physicians, applied to other health professions, and adapted to other languages.