Interpreter Services and Healthcare Access for Asian American Immigrants: A Scoping Review

Background and Purpose:
Asian American communities are among the fastest growing and most linguistically diverse racial groups in the United States, with over 100 languages and dialects spoken across more than 20 ethnic subgroups. Despite increasing awareness of the need for inclusive healthcare, significant disparities in language access persist, particularly for individuals with limited English proficiency (LEP). Interpreter services are commonly offered to bridge these gaps, but there implementation, quality, and alignment with patient needs vary widely. This scoping review synthesizes empirical research on interpreter services in U.S. healthcare settings for Asian American immigrants with LEP. The goal was to examine how interpreter services are delivered, experienced, and evaluated, with attention to implications for care access, health equity, and culturally responsive service models.

Methods:
Following Arksey and O’Malley’s five-stage framework (2005) for scoping reviews, literature searches were conducted using multiple databases, including PubMed, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar. Search terms included combinations of “interpreter services,” “Asian Americans,” “limited English proficiency,” “healthcare communication,” and “screening or outcomes.” Studies were eligible if they (a) were peer-reviewed empirical articles, (b) focused on interpreter service use in U.S. healthcare contexts, and (c) involved Asian American or Asian immigrant LEP populations. A total of 9 studies among 158 from 2000 to 2024 met the criteria.

Results:
Three major thematic domains were identified: (1) interpreter services and healthcare outcomes, (2) patients’ experiences and language barriers, and (3) interpreter training and best practices. Four studies reported that interpreter services improve screening rates, enhance patient satisfaction, and increase perceived quality of care. However, patients prefer language-concordant providers over interpreter-mediated encounters, and outcomes tend to be more favorable when patients communicate directly with their clinicians. Five studies examined patients’ experiences with interpreters, revealing persistent dissatisfaction with interpreter accuracy, professionalism, and role clarity. Some patients reported delaying care or withholding information due to a lack of trust in interpreter services, and others chose not to request interpreters due to concerns about privacy or stigma. Two studies further explored interpreter training and institutional support, each examining distinct facets of interpreter implementation. Both found that interpreters were frequently expected to take on additional responsibilities, such as providing emotional support, and navigating cultural differences, without formal raining or role clarity. These findings reflect broader gaps in system-level preparation and investment in interpreter workforce development

Conclusions and Implications:
Interpreter services are essential for providing equitable care to Asian American immigrants with LEP. Challenges such as inconsistent training, unclear roles, and insufficient collaboration among providers can undermine the effectiveness of interpretation in clinical settings. To enhance equity within health systems, it is essential to establish standardized interpreter protocols, develop a culturally competent workforce, and incorporate language access into quality improvement strategies. Future research should focus on co-designing interpreter services with immigrant communities and integrating them into interdisciplinary care models. These steps are vital for creating a more inclusive healthcare environment.