Interpreting in pediatric therapy settings during the COVID-19 pandemic: benefits and limitations of remote communication technologies and their effect on turn-taking and role boundary
Keywords:remote interpreting, video remote interpreting, pediatric therapy interpreting, occupational therapy, physical therapy, speech therapy, turn-taking in remote settings, interpretación a distancia, interpretación a distancia por vídeo, interpretación en terapia pediátrica, terapia ocupacional, fisioterapia, logopedia, toma de turnos en entornos remotos
With the disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, in the United States, social, educational, and health services, in addition to legal proceedings and conferences, became accessible primarily through various remote technologies. Language access was almost exclusively provided through remote telecommunication platforms, audio and/or video. Many of these platforms were not optimized nor designed for interpreting support. Service providers, interpreters, and their Limited English Proficient (LEP) clients, were faced with increased communication and logistical challenges and had to get creative in their endeavors in order to ensure minimal disruption and continuity of care and service provision. This study explores remote interpreting in pediatric therapy settings. More specifically, it examines both the benefits and the challenges of remote interpreting in speech, physical, and occupational therapy settings. It considers how different remote communication platforms may impact role boundaries and turn-taking from both the provider’s and the interpreter’s perspective.
Azarmina, P. & Wallace. P. (2005). Remote interpretation in medical encounters: a systematic review.
Journal of telemedicine and telecare, 11(3), 140-145. https://doi.org/10.1258/1357633053688679
Belisle-Hansen, J. P. (2016). Interpreting at a distance: A comparative analysis of turn-taking in video
remote interpreting and on-site interpreting. [Unpublished master’s thesis] University of Oslo.
Braun, S. & Taylor, J. (2012). Video-Mediated Interpreting: An Overview of Current Practice and Research.
In Videoconference and Remote Interpreting in Criminal Proceedings. Intersentia.
Braun, S. (2015). Remote Interpreting. In H. Mikkelson & R. Jourdenais (Eds.). Routledge Handbook of
Interpreting. Routledge. https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9781315745381
Braun, S. (2017). What a micro-analytical investigation of additions and expansions in remote
interpreting can tell us about interpreters’ participation in a shared virtual space. Journal of Pragmatics, 107, 165-177.
Braun, S. (2019). Technology and Interpreting. In M. O’Hagan (Ed.), Routledge Handbook of Translation
and Technology. Routledge. https://www.routledge.com/The-Routledge-Handbook-of TranslationandTechnology/OHagan/p/book/9781138232846
De Boe, E. (2020). Remote interpreting in healthcare settings: a comparative study on the influence of telephone and video link use on the quality of interpreter-mediated communication [Doctoral dissertation]. University of Antwerp.
Douglas, M. (2012). The Center for Hearing and Speech: Bilingual Support Services through
Videoconferencing Technology. The Volta Review, 112(3), 345-356. https://doi.org/10.17955/tvr.112.3.m.713
Dudovskiy, J. (n.d.). Snowball sampling. Business Research Methodology. Retrieved January 9, 2022 from
Fantinuoli, C. (Ed.). (2018). Interpreting and technology. Language Science Press. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1493281
Harris. P.A., Taylor, R., Thielke, R., Payne, J., Gonzalez ,N., & Conde, J.G. (2009). Research
electronic data capture (REDCap) – A metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for
providing translational research informatics support, J Biomed Inform. Apr;42(2): 377-81.
Kelly, N. (2008). Telephone interpreting: A comprehensive guide to the profession. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Klammer, & Pöchhacker, F. (2021). Video remote interpreting in clinical communication: A multimodal analysis. Patient Education and Counseling, 104(12), 2867-2876. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2021.08.024
Mikkelson, H. (2016). Remote interpreting. In Introduction to Court Interpreting (pp. 124-135). Routledge.
Napier, J., and Leneham, M. (2011). “It Was Difficult to Manage the Communication”: Testing the Feasibility
of Video Remote Signed Language Interpreting in Court. Journal of Interpretation, 21(1), Article 5.
Napier, J., Skinner, R., Braun, S. (2018). Interpreting via video link: Mapping of the field. In J. Napier,
R. Skinner, S. Braun (Eds.), Here or there: research on interpreting via video link (pp.11-35). Washington DC: Gallaudet.
Price, Pérez-Stable, E. J., Nickleach, D., López, M., & Karliner, L. S. (2011). Interpreter perspectives of
in-person, telephonic, and videoconferencing medical interpretation in clinical encounters.
Patient Education and Counseling, 87(2), 226-232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2011.08.006
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2022, January 22). Notification of Enforcement
Discretion for Telehealth Remote Communications During the COVID-19 Nationwide Public
Valero-Garcés, C. (2018). PSIT and Technology. Challenges in the digital age. FITISPos International
Journal, 5(1), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.37536/FITISPos-IJ.2018.5.1.185
Yabe, M. (2019). Healthcare Providers’ and Deaf Patients’ Perspectives on Video Remote Interpreting: A
Mixed Methods Study. [Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Chicago]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
Copyright (c) 2022 Indira Sultanic
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
a. Authors retain copyright and guaranteeing the journal the right to be the first publication of the work as licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
b. Authors can set separate additional agreements for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in the journal (eg, place it in an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
c. It allows and encourages authors to disseminate their work electronically (eg, in institutional repositories or on their own website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as to a subpoena more early and most of the published works (See The Effect of Open Access) (in English).