ABSTRACT
In 2019, a new variant of coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) created a global pandemic that has highlighted and exacerbated health disparities. Educating the general public about COVID-19 is one of the primary mitigation strategies amongst health professionals. English is not the preferred language for an estimated 22% of the United States population making effective mass communication efforts difficult to achieve. This study seeks to understand and compare several topics surrounding COVID-19 health communication and healthcare disparities between individuals with English language preference (ELP) and non-English language preference (NELP) within the United States. A survey available in seven languages asking about knowledge and opinions on COVID-19, vaccines, preferred sources of health information, and other questions, was administered February-April 2021 to patients at an urban federally qualified health center that also serves global refugees and immigrants. Descriptive statistics and comparative analysis were performed to identify differences between ELP and NELP individuals. Analysis of 144 surveys, 33 of which were NELP, showed 90.97% of all patients agreed that COVID-19 was a serious disease and 66.67% would receive the COVID-19 vaccine. There were numerous differences between ELP and NELP individuals, including trust in government, symptom identification, preferred source of health information, and feelings that cultural needs had been met. This study has identified several significant differences in patient perceptions relating to the COVID-19 pandemic when comparing NELP to ELP and highlighted areas where improvement can occur. Applying this information, easily utilized targeted resources can be created to quickly intervene and address health disparities among patients seeking care at an urban community health center.
Abbreviations
ELP: English language preference; NELP: non-English language preference; CDC: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; FQHC: Federally Qualified Health Center
Ethical Approval and Consent to participate
This study was submitted and approved by Wright State University’s Institutional Review Board (IRB #: SC6006, OHRP #: IRB00000034) prior to study initiation. Once approved, participants consented to the survey and publication of deidentified information.
Consent for Publication
All authors consented to publication
Availability of Data
Most data generated from this study are included in the published article, remaining data are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Authors’ contributions
All authors read and approved the final manuscript
CE: Study design, analysis, interpretation of data, drafted the work, substantively revised work, correspondence
SR: Study design, analysis, interpretation of data, and substantively revised work
JD: Study design, interpretation of data, and substantively revised work
MG: Data acquisition, interpretation of data, and substantively revised work
EVM: Data acquisition, interpretation of data, and substantively revised work
KC: Study design, analysis, interpretation of data, and substantively revised work
PH: Study design, analysis, interpretation of data, and substantively revised work
TC: Analysis, interpretation of data, substantively revised work
Correction Statement
This article has been corrected with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.