ified in Embase and PubMed and screened by 2 independent reviewers. Ten studies, which included 3 prospective cohort studies, 6 retrospective cohort studies, and 1 cross-sectional study, met inclusion and exclusion criteria. All studies were of high-quality rating according to the Newcastle–Ottawa scale. Subsequently, the Levels of Evidence Rating Scale for Prognostic/Risk Studies and Grade Practice Recommendations from the American Society of Plastic Surgeons were used to assess the quality of evidence of each study and the strength of the body of evidence, respectively. There is strong evidence that professional medical interpreter (PMI) use or having a language-concordant provider for LEP patients improves understanding of the procedural consent. The evidence also highly suggests that LEP patients are at risk of poorer postoperative pain control and poorer understanding of discharge instructions compared with English-speaking patients. Further studies are needed to discern whether consistent PMI use can minimize the disparities in pain control and discharge planning between LEP and English-proficient (EP) patients. There is some evidence that LEP status is not associated with differences in having adequate access to and receiving surgical preoperative evaluation. However, the evidence is weak given the small number of studies available. There are currently no studies on whether LEP status impacts access to preoperative evaluation by an anesthesiology-led team to optimize the patient for surgery. There is some evidence to suggest that LEP patients, especially when PMI services are not used consistently, are at risk for increased length of stay, more complications, and worse clinical outcomes. The available outcomes research is limited by the relative infrequency of complications. Additionally, only 4 studies validated whether LEP patients utilized a PMI. Future studies should use larger sample sizes and ascertain whether LEP patients utilized a PMI, and the effect of PMI use on outcomes....

中文翻译：

---

有限的英语能力和围手术期以患者为中心的结果：系统评价

在 Embase 和 PubMed 中验证，并由 2 名独立审稿人筛选。十项研究符合纳入和排除标准，其中包括 3 项前瞻性队列研究、6 项回顾性队列研究和 1 项横断面研究。根据纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表，所有研究均获得高质量评级。随后，分别使用美国整形外科医生协会的预后/风险研究证据等级评定量表和等级实践建议来评估每项研究的证据质量和证据体的强度。有强有力的证据表明，使用专业医疗口译员 (PMI) 或为 LEP 患者提供语言一致的提供者可以提高对程序同意的理解。证据还强烈表明，与英语患者相比，LEP 患者术后疼痛控制较差，对出院说明的理解较差。需要进一步的研究来辨别持续使用 PMI 是否可以最大限度地减少 LEP 和英语熟练 (EP) 患者之间在疼痛控制和出院计划方面的差异。有一些证据表明，LEP 状态与获得足够的机会和接受手术术前评估的差异无关。然而，鉴于现有研究数量较少，证据薄弱。目前尚无关于 LEP 状态是否影响麻醉科领导团队进行术前评估以优化患者手术的研究。有一些证据表明，LEP 患者，尤其是在未持续使用 PMI 服务的情况下，面临住院时间延长、并发症增多和临床结果恶化的风险。可用的结果研究受到并发症相对较少发生的限制。此外，只有 4 项研究验证了 LEP 患者是否使用了 PMI。未来的研究应该使用更大的样本量，并确定 LEP 患者是否使用 PMI，以及 PMI 使用对结果的影响......