PP1201 - Communication with Patients Who Use American Sign Language: Insights from West Texas Physicians

Abstract:
This cohort study identifies gaps in training among physicians communicating with the Deaf community who use American Sign Language (ASL) in West Texas clinics. Data was collected from 36 physicians using a Qualtrics survey. Results indicated that 83% had seen a patient who uses ASL with 97% anticipating future encounters. 86% of physicians were not fluent in ASL, with 79% preferring ASL interpreters for communication. While 69% of participants were aware of how to access ASL interpreters, 45% were unaware of additional resources. This study identifies gaps in physician knowledge regarding ASL communication resources and the need for further training.

Summary:
Design
This was a retrospective cohort questionnaire study of providers and their experiences with ASL-signing patients in their practices. A dataset of primary care providers (family medicine, pediatrics, and internal medicine) located in West Texas and the surrounding communities was created from an online survey. A Qualtrics questionnaire was distributed to those providers across West Texas to learn about their experiences working with ASL-signing patients with data collected over a 6-six-month period.

Results 
The questionnaire generated 36 responses with a physician response rate of approximately 10%. The researchers successfully collected 36 survey responses. Of those 36, 30 (83%) respondents had seen a patient who uses ASL in their practice. 29 of 30 (97%) participants anticipated or possibly anticipated seeing a future patient who uses ASL. The age of the correspondents varied with 5 of 29 (17%) participants being between the ages of 26-35 years; 16 of 29 (55%) respondents being between the ages of 36-55 years; 7 of 29 (24%) participants being between the ages of 56-70 years; And 1 of 29 participants being 70 years or older. 23 of 29 (79%) participants were female, countering the 21% that were male. The fluency of ASL amongst physicians showed that 86% (25 of 29) were not fluent in ASL; 7% (2 of 29) were somewhat fluent in ASL; And 7% (2 of 29) were fluent in ASL. The physician responses showed that 23 of 29 (79%) showed a preference for communicating with patients via ASL interpreters. Alternatively, direct communication (using ASL) had 7% (2 of 29) preference, communicating with a caregiver, friend, or relative was preferred by 7% (2 of 29), and other forms of communication were preferred by 7% (2 of 29) respondents. Those who chose “other” indicated they used conversational ASL but used an interpreter for medical information and the other stated they used several methods including ASL, written, and family friend. Of the participants only, 69% knew how to access an ASL interpreter. 13 of 29 participants were unaware of resources to communicate effectively with ASL patients, countering the 55% who are aware. 52% (15 of 29) of participants had in the past proactively sought out resources to help Deaf patients.

Conclusion
The goal of this study was to identify gaps in the knowledge of physicians for resources that could help bridge communication barriers when interacting with Deaf patients, who use ASL for communication. West Texas has a thriving medical center that serves a diverse patient population that spans a radius of 500 miles. By conducting this research, the researchers hope to raise awareness and provide a better understanding of areas of improvement in training our physicians that serve the Deaf/hard of hearing population of the greater West Texas region.