Canadian Society of Telehealth 04 EVALUATION OF VIDEO RELAY INTERPRETING SERVICES FOR THE DEAF AND H

1
Canadian Society of Telehealth 04EVALUATION OF
VIDEO RELAY INTERPRETING SERVICES FOR THE DEAF
AND HARD OF HEARING ON THE MAINE TELEHEALTH
NETWORK

• Dubois T1, Edwards M1, Newton D2, Morin L2
• 1Maine Telemedicine Services/HealthWays
• 2Pine Tree Society for Disabled Children Adults
• Funded by
• Technology Opportunities Program (TOP), US
  Department of
• Commerce, and
• Maine Health Access Foundation (MeHAF)

2
Video Relay Interpreting Project

• A Joint Initiative Of
• Maine Telemedicine Services
• Pine Tree Society for Disabled Children Adults
• Maine Hospital Association

With Funding From
Technology Opportunities Program (formerly TIIAP)
under the US Department of Commerce
Maine Healthy Access Foundation
3
What is VRI?

• Sign language interpreting
• Two parties at same location communicating
  through a distant interpreter
• 384 kilobits per second

• 30 frames per second
• ISDN-based system
• Open architecture
• Uses licensed, certified medical interpreters

4
What VRI Is Not

• VRI is NOT the same as VRS, or Video Relay
  Services
• Not Web-based it does not have the security
  risks associated with the internet protocol (IP)
  based VRS systems
• VRS does not use licensed, certified medical
  interpreters

5
Origins of the VRI Project

• Pine Tree Society
• Founded in 1936, Pine Tree Society provides
  direct service programs statewide to people with
  disabilities.
• A Deaf interpreter service launched in 1975 to
  assist Deaf clients in contacts with non-Deaf
  individuals
• legal procedures,
• medical appointments, and
• political hearings.
• All interpreters associated with the service are
  certified by the Society.

6
Need For Expanded Access

• The majority of qualified interpreters are
  clustered along the I-95 corridor south of
  Bangor.
• A three-hour drive each way is common to respond
  to hospitals needing interpreting services.

7
Need For Expanded Access

• Practitioner Survey Findings

8
Need For Expanded Access

• Focus Group Findings

9
Maine Telemedicine Services
 
 

• A Division of HealthWays
• Based in Lubec, Maine
• Non-profit community health center founded in
  1971
• Services
• Outpatient primary health care
• Home health care
• Substance abuse treatment
• Prevention programs
• Telemedicine developmental services

10
MISSION
 
 

• To improve community health and well-being in
  rural Maine by supporting health care, mental
  health, social service, government, and
  educational agencies to enhance access to their
  services through interactive teleconferencing
  (ITV) and other technologies.

11
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
 
 

• MTS provides comprehensive resource development
  and technical and professional services to help
  agencies and providers deliver and receive high
  quality services via telemedicine and IVC

12
Maine Telehealth Network
 
 

• Approximately 250 sites across the state include
  health care, mental health, social service,
  government and educational members and comprise
  the Maine Telehealth Network.

13
OVERARCHING GOALS

• To improve Deaf and Hard of Hearing clients
  access to high-quality interpreting services, and
  to improve knowledge and commitment to meeting
  this population's communication assistance needs

14
EVALUATION ELEMENTSMultifaceted Approach

• Knowledge Testing
• Focus Groups
• Site Coordinator
• Interpreter Survey
• Provider Survey
• Patient/Client Survey

15
EVALUATION FINDINGSImproved Knowledge
Commitment Level

• Culture Training Results
• 72 average pretest score
• 90 average posttest score
• 25 improvement
• EXAMPLES (True/False)
• Deaf culture A Deaf person prefers to be
  called hearing impaired
• Consumer rights to communication assistance It
  is the hospitals responsibility to provide an
  interpreter
• and other services to those who need them

16
EVALUATION FINDINGSImproved Knowledge
Commitment Level
17
EVALUATION FINDINGSImproved Knowledge
Commitment Level

• Site Coordinator Survey (8 of 21 sites
  reporting)
• 67 of attendees were direct care staff or
  registration personnel
• All sites paid staff for training time
• One site require approximately 1/3 of staff to
  receive training for most sites it was mandatory
  for 1/5 of staff

18
EVALUATION FINDINGSImproved Access

• Patient Surveys (23 returned)
• True or False
• Before VRI, I brought a person with me to help
  65 True
• With VRI, I can get help closer to home 70
  True
• Without VRI here, I would not get help 39
  True
• Without VRI here, I have to go to a different
  hospital and bring a person with me to help me
  communicate 39 True

19
EVALUATION FINDINGSHigh Quality of Services

• Practitioner Survey (23 returned)
• Quality of Communication with VRI
• (Excellent, Good, So-So, Poor, or Very
  Poor)
• Patient able to explain problem 96 Much
  Improved, Improved or Same
• Patient understanding of my assessment 91 Much
  Improved, Improved or Same
• Patient understanding of instructions 91 Much
  Improved, Improved or Same

20
EVALUATION FINDINGS
High Quality of Services
21
EVALUATION FINDINGSHigh Quality of Services

• Practitioner Survey (23 returned)
• Quality of Communication with VRI
• Versus In-Person Professional Interpreter
• (Much Improved, Improved, Same, Worse,
  Much Worse or N/A)
• Patient able to explain problem 88 Much
  Improved, Improved or Same
• Patient understanding of my assessment 93 Much
  Improved, Improved or Same
• Patient understanding of instructions 86 Much
  Improved, Improved or Same

22
EVALUATION FINDINGS
High Quality of Services
23
EVALUATION FINDINGSHigh Quality of Services

• Practitioner Survey (23 returned)
• Quality of Communication with VRI
• versus Without Professional Interpreter
• (Much Improved, Improved, Same, Worse,
  Much Worse or N/A)
• Patient able to explain problem 94 Much
  Improved, Improved or Same
• Patient understanding of my assessment 93 Much
  Improved, Improved or Same
• Patient understanding of instructions 94 Much
  Improved, Improved or Same

24
EVALUATION FINDINGS
High Quality of Services
25
EVALUATION FINDINGSHigh Quality of Services

• Interpreter Survey (32 returned)
• (True or False)
• Did the hospital staff know how to work with you
  effectively? 90 True
• Did the hospital staff follow the VRI protocol?
  88 True
• Overall, how does your experience with VRI
  compare to with in-person interpreting (Better,
  Same, A little worse, Much worse)? 81
  Same or Better

26
EVALUATION FINDINGSHigh Quality of Services

• Patient Survey (23 surveys returned)
• (True or False)
• With VRI, I feel more comfortable with the
  hospital staff. 90 True
• With VRI, I can communicate better with hospital
  staff. 85 True
• With VRI, I can explain my problem better. 94
  True

27
EVALUATION FINDINGSHigh Quality of Services

• Patient Survey (23 surveys returned)
• (Continued)
• With VRI, I understand better what the hospital
  staff told me about my problem. 95 True
• With VRI, I understand better what I need to do
  to feel better. 90 True