TY - JOUR
T1 - Classifying Interpreter Behaviors During Aphasia Assessments
T2 - Survey Results and Checklist Development
AU - Babbitt, Edna M.
AU - Ginsberg-Jaeckle, Matthew
AU - Larkin, Elissa
AU - Escarcega, Sylvia
AU - Cherney, Leora R.
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors would like to thank the participants with aphasia and the interpreters for giving their time to be a part of the study; The Coleman Foundation for funding; and Danielle Williams, speech-language pathologist (SLP), for her input regarding content for the SLP and interpreter surveys and for conducting the aphasia assessments.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.
PY - 2022/10
Y1 - 2022/10
N2 - Purpose: It is known that interpreter-mediated aphasia assessments may not provide the linguistic information that speech-language pathologists (SLPs) need to provide accurate diagnoses and determine treatment goals. The purpose of our study was to understand the perceptions of SLPs and interpreters who collaborate in a medical setting and to develop a checklist to categorize and quantify the errors interpreters make. Interpreter training may lead to unin-tentional errors that impact the information the SLP gains from the assessment session. Method: In Phase 1 of the study, 38 hospital SLPs and 26 interpreters responded to survey questions about their experiences working with the other discipline. In Phase 2, eight Spanish-speaking interpreters and two Spanish-speaking participants with fluent aphasia took part in a standardized interpreter-mediated aphasia assessment. A bilingual SLP and a Spanish-speaking interpreter analyzed and coded the assessments for errors in the interpreters’ behaviors. Results: Results from the survey demonstrated that both SLPs and interpreters would like the interpreters to have more education regarding the diagnosis of aphasia and an understanding of the SLP’s goals during an aphasia assessment. A lack of time was considered the primary hindrance to educating interpreters during an evaluation session. The checklist included interpreter behaviors that could significantly impact the SLP’s ability to diagnose aphasia: omission of speech/language information, meaning errors, and cueing. Positive behaviors noted were calling attention to patient error and pointing out potential confusing items. Conclusions: Education for both disciplines will enhance the accuracy of interpreter-mediated aphasia assessments. A checklist tool with specific exam-ples of errors may be useful in educating not only experienced interpreters and SLPs but also students in both disciplines.
AB - Purpose: It is known that interpreter-mediated aphasia assessments may not provide the linguistic information that speech-language pathologists (SLPs) need to provide accurate diagnoses and determine treatment goals. The purpose of our study was to understand the perceptions of SLPs and interpreters who collaborate in a medical setting and to develop a checklist to categorize and quantify the errors interpreters make. Interpreter training may lead to unin-tentional errors that impact the information the SLP gains from the assessment session. Method: In Phase 1 of the study, 38 hospital SLPs and 26 interpreters responded to survey questions about their experiences working with the other discipline. In Phase 2, eight Spanish-speaking interpreters and two Spanish-speaking participants with fluent aphasia took part in a standardized interpreter-mediated aphasia assessment. A bilingual SLP and a Spanish-speaking interpreter analyzed and coded the assessments for errors in the interpreters’ behaviors. Results: Results from the survey demonstrated that both SLPs and interpreters would like the interpreters to have more education regarding the diagnosis of aphasia and an understanding of the SLP’s goals during an aphasia assessment. A lack of time was considered the primary hindrance to educating interpreters during an evaluation session. The checklist included interpreter behaviors that could significantly impact the SLP’s ability to diagnose aphasia: omission of speech/language information, meaning errors, and cueing. Positive behaviors noted were calling attention to patient error and pointing out potential confusing items. Conclusions: Education for both disciplines will enhance the accuracy of interpreter-mediated aphasia assessments. A checklist tool with specific exam-ples of errors may be useful in educating not only experienced interpreters and SLPs but also students in both disciplines.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85140396083&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85140396083&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1044/2022_AJSLP-21-00306
DO - 10.1044/2022_AJSLP-21-00306
M3 - Article
C2 - 35858273
AN - SCOPUS:85140396083
SN - 1058-0360
VL - 31
SP - 2329
EP - 2347
JO - American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology
JF - American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology
IS - 5s
ER -