Video-interpreting for cognitive assessments: an intervention study and micro-costing analysis

Hwang, Kerry, De Silva, Anurika, Simpson, Julie A, LoGiudice, Dina, Engel, Lidia, Gilbert, Andrew S, Croy, Samantha and Haralambous, Betty 2020, Video-interpreting for cognitive assessments: an intervention study and micro-costing analysis, Journal of telemedicine and telecare, pp. 1-10, doi: 10.1177/1357633X20914445.

Attached Files
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads

Title Video-interpreting for cognitive assessments: an intervention study and micro-costing analysis
Author(s) Hwang, Kerry
De Silva, Anurika
Simpson, Julie A
LoGiudice, Dina
Engel, LidiaORCID iD for Engel, Lidia
Gilbert, Andrew S
Croy, Samantha
Haralambous, Betty
Journal name Journal of telemedicine and telecare
Start page 1
End page 10
Total pages 10
Publisher SAGE Publications
Place of publication London, Eng.
Publication date 2020-03-30
ISSN 1357-633X
Keyword(s) Science & Technology
Life Sciences & Biomedicine
Health Care Sciences & Services
cost analysis
Summary Introduction Evidence in the literature demonstrates the reliability of cognitive screening assessments using video technology in English-speaking older populations. However, this has not been tested in older culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) populations who require an interpreter, and what the associated costs would be. The aim was to determine if the Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale (RUDAS) and the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) could be reliably administered over video-interpreting methods compared with face-to-face interpreting. In addition, the study aims to compare the costs of video-interpreting with the costs of face-to-face interpreting. Methods We compared similarity of the RUDAS and GDS scores when administered face-to-face and via video-interpreting. The similarity of scores between methods was analysed using paired t-tests and Bland–Altman plots. A costing analysis was done using a micro-costing approach to estimate the costs of video-interpreting compared with face-to-face, extrapolated to a national level. Results Analysis found no significant differences in the mean assessment scores between video-interpreting and face-to-face (RUDAS mean difference: −0.36; 95% confidence interval (CI): −1.09, 0.38, GDS mean difference: 0.22; 95% CI: −0.38, 0.83). Bland–Altman plots demonstrated that 71% of RUDAS scores and 82% of GDS scores were within the maximum allowed difference of ±2 units. Costing analysis showed a A$7 saving per assessment when using video-interpreting compared with face-to-face, with a total national saving of A$247,350. Discussion Video-interpreting was found to be as reliable as face-to-face interpreting for both RUDAS and GDS assessments. Cost analysis indicates that video-interpreting is cheaper than face-to-face interpreting.
Language eng
DOI 10.1177/1357633X20914445
Indigenous content off
Field of Research 0806 Information Systems
0903 Biomedical Engineering
1117 Public Health and Health Services
HERDC Research category C1 Refereed article in a scholarly journal
Persistent URL

Document type: Journal Article
Collections: Faculty of Health
School of Health and Social Development
Connect to link resolver
Unless expressly stated otherwise, the copyright for items in DRO is owned by the author, with all rights reserved.

Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 1 times in TR Web of Science
Scopus Citation Count Cited 1 times in Scopus
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Access Statistics: 65 Abstract Views, 0 File Downloads  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Mon, 11 May 2020, 13:49:22 EST

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact