Trial Outcomes & Findings for Visualizations to Improve Pain Communication Between Patients, Interpreters, and Providers (NCT NCT04975789)

Participants were enrolled from October 2021 to February 2023.

Enrolled participants have an associated participant group, which includes the patient, the interpreter, and the provider.

Visualizations to Improve Pain Communication Between Patients, Interpreters, and Providers

Feasibility with respect to recruitment will be measured by the percent of eligible patients who enroll.

Feasibility with respect to retention will be measured by the proportion of patients who complete the study.

Feasibility with respect to tool use will be measured as the proportion of InfoViz tools with pain severity marked, at least one pain location marked, and at least one pain quality marked on the InfoViz tool.

Feasibility will be in part measured by InfoViz tool fidelity. The percentage of items correctly performed by participants on the investigator-designed fidelity checklist will be reported.

One question item from the 6-item Mutual Understanding Scale (MUS) asks participants about their main symptom (i.e., "What was the most important health complaint for which the physician was visited?") and providers to report participants' main symptom (e.g., "What was the most important health complaint for which the patient consulted with you?"). The percentage of congruency between the patient and interpreter response, from 0-100 where 100 is total congruency.

One question item from the 6-item Mutual Understanding Scale (MUS) asks participants about their main symptom (i.e., "What was the most important health complaint for which the physician was visited?") and providers to report participants' main symptom (e.g., "What was the most important health complaint for which the patient consulted with you?"). The percentage of congruency between the interpreter and provider, from 0-100 where 100 is total congruency.

One question item from the 6-item Mutual Understanding Scale (MUS) asks participants about their main symptom (i.e., "What was the most important health complaint for which the physician was visited?") and providers to report participants' main symptom (e.g., "What was the most important health complaint for which the patient consulted with you?"). The percentage of congruency between patient and provider, from 0-100 where 100 is total congruency.

Satisfaction with communication will be measured using one item, "Overall, how satisfied are you with your doctor's communication with you about pain?" with response categories of very satisfied, satisfied, neither satisfied nor dissatisfied, dissatisfied, or very dissatisfied. Mean score between 1-5, where 5 indicate higher satisfaction and 1 indicate very dissatisfaction, was calculated across participant groups (i.e., patient, interpreter, provider).

Participants will be asked to rate the amount of pain relief experienced since the clinic visit using a 5-point Verbal Rating Scale: none, slight, moderate, lots, complete. A mean score between 1-5, where higher scores equal complete pain relief.

One question item derived from the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey, "During the past 4 weeks, how much did pain interfere with your normal work including both work outside the home and housework?" with response options: "not at all," "a little bit," "moderately," "quite a bit," or "extremely." The number of participants who responded to each condition will be reported. Mean score 1-5, where higher score indicates extreme pain interference, was calculated.

Quality of communication will be measured using one item, "Overall, how would you rate this doctor's communication about pain with you? " with response items of excellent, very good, good, fair, or poor. Mean scores of 1 to 5, where higher number indicates excellent quality of communication, was calculated.