Barriers in Healthcare for Latinx Patients with Limited English Proficiency—a Narrative Review

Latinx (includes Hispanics and is the non-gendered term for Latino/Latina which is a person of Latin American origin or descent) constitutes the largest racial and ethnic minority group in the United States (US). Many members of this group report limited English proficiency, experience discrimination, feel distrust in the healthcare setting, and face poorer health outcomes than non-Latinx Whites. As healthcare systems assess internal structures of care, understanding the experiences of Latinx patients may inform strategies to improve care. This narrative review describes studies that assessed the experiences of Latinx patients with limited English proficiency (LEP) in the inpatient and outpatient settings in the US. We searched PubMed for studies published between January 1, 1990, and March 2021. We reviewed all citations and available abstracts ( n = 429). We classified study titles ( n = 156) as warranting detailed consideration of the original article. Limited English proficiency is a well-documented challenge reported by Latinx patients seeking care in the outpatient setting, resulting in mistrust of healthcare organizations and clinicians. The effects of LEP overlap substantially with challenges related to patients’ immigration status, cultural traditions, and socioeconomic needs. Use of professional interpretation rather than ad hoc interpretation improves trust and satisfaction. There is no consensus about the most effective mode of delivering professional interpretation (in person, telephonic, video conferencing), although rapid simultaneous telephone translation is a promising modality. Increasing awareness of the barriers to effective communication, improving skills in communicating through translators, and increasing the amount of time spent with patients may improve communication and trust more than structural changes like mode of translation or bedside rounding. Cultural fluency training, standardized language training for providers, and incentive pay for fluency are also deserving of further consideration.