648 - Telemedicine and developmental disabilities diagnosis: A systematic review of bilingual considerations

Telemedicine holds promise for ensuring more equitable access to care. Developmental disabilities are often under diagnosed in marginalized communities because of less equitable access to diagnostic practitioners. A consideration of the language of the patients in such telemedicine contexts of diagnosis of developmental disabilities is a pertinent consideration.

Objective:

The goal of this report is to ascertain the state of telehealth diagnosis of developmental disabilities which consider bilingual or non-English speaking patients. We do this to draw attention to either a lack of consideration in the academic research literature or to highlight the ways in which non-English speakers can be best served via equitable access to diagnostic information about children (0-12) with developmental disabilities.

Design/Methods:

We conducted a literature search in Scopus using the Boolean logic: “developmental delay” OR “language delay” OR “language concern” OR “language problem” OR “expressive language delay” OR “receptive language delay” OR “receptive language concern” OR “receptive language problem” OR “speech delay”  OR “communication delay” OR “intellectual delay” OR “intellectual concern”  OR “learning disability”  OR “reading delay” OR “reading concern” OR “reading problem” OR “social delay” OR “social concern” OR “social problem” OR “self-help concern” OR “daily living problem” OR “behavioral delay” OR “behavioral concern” OR “behavioral problem” OR “neurobehavioral delay” OR “neurobehavioral concern” OR “neurobehavioral problem” OR “autism” OR “Spanish” OR “bilingual”. Limits: Publication year: 2001–2021, peer reviewed journal, document type: journal article, exclude dissertations, studies outside without participants in the United States. Population group: human, age group: childhood (birth-12 years).

Results:

The search returned 42 citations with only a systematic review mentioning one study out of hundreds that mentioned deafness and language considerations in the description of “profound deafness” as translated into Spanish. However, this systematic review did not find studies with a focus on bilingualism and appropriate approaches to telehealth diagnoses of developmental disabilities. One study considered a tablet-based screener but did not accept participants who did not speak English. All other studies were disqualified based upon the above-described exclusion criteria.

Conclusion(s):

To achieve the promise of telehealth for equitable diagnostic practices and the interventions which follow, the language of patients may need to be further considered in the pediatric research literature.