HospitalInspections.org

Based on interview, medical record review and review of policies and procedures it was determined the facility failed to inform 6 of 10 sampled non-English speaking patients of their patient rights in a language, manner or form that they could understand (Patients 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6). Findings include:

During the survey a sample of medical records of ten non-English speaking patients was selected for review. In addition, hospital policies "Patient Rights and Responsibilities," "Informed Consent," "Interpretation Services for Patients," and "Release of Information" were reviewed.

Hospital policy "Informed Consent," states that "it is Providence Medford Medical Centers (PMMC) responsibility to ensure that the patient has given informed consent..." and that "the patient is given sufficient information...to enable the patient to make an informed decision as to whether or not he/she wishes to freely, voluntarily consent."

Hospital policy "Interpretation Services for Patients" states it is the policy of PMMC to provide services to "non-English or Limited-English-Proficiency patients" in a manner "to achieve medical communication that is complete and understandable to the patient..."

Interview and record review revealed the hospital failed to implement hospital policies "Informed Consent," and "Interpretation Services for Patients," for Patients 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6.

Patient 1 had been admitted to the hospital on 1/4/12. According to hospital admission records, Patient 1 was Spanish speaking, and his/her "preferred language for discussing healthcare was Spanish." However, review of Patient 1's medical record revealed that the patient had been provided an English version of both the "Consent for Surgery" and "Conditions of Service" forms. Although Patient 1's "preferred language for healthcare" was Spanish, only English versions of those medical forms were used.

Patient 2 had been admitted to the hospital on 1/18/12. According to hospital admission records, Patient 2 was Spanish speaking, and his/her "preferred language for discussing healthcare was Spanish." Review of Patient 2's medical record revealed that the patient had been provided an English version of both the "Consent for Surgery" and "Conditions of Service" forms. Although Patient 2's "preferred language for healthcare" was Spanish, only English versions of those medical forms were provided.

Patient 3 had been admitted to the hospital on 2/16/12, and Patient 4 on 3/2/12. According to hospital admission records both patients were Spanish speaking, and their "preferred language for discussing healthcare was Spanish." Record review determined that both Patient 3 and 4 had been provided only the English version of the Conditions of Service medical form. The hospital failed to provide medical communication to Patients 3 and 4 in their "preferred" language.

Patient 5 had been admitted to the hospital on 12/8/09, and Patient 6 on 2/22/12. According to hospital admission records both patients were Spanish speaking, and their "preferred language for discussing healthcare was Spanish." Record review determined that both Patients 5 and 6 had been provided only the English version of both the Conditions of Service and Informed Consent medical forms. The hospital failed to provide medical communication to Patients 5 and 6 in their "preferred" language.

In interview on 3/19/12 at 2:10 pm Director of Admissions indicated that both hospital forms "Consent for Surgery, Recovery, Anesthesia, Medical Treatment, or Other Procedures" and "Conditions of Service" were available in both English and Spanish versions. Witness E could provide no explanation of why the Spanish versions of those forms had not been provided to Patients 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6.