Background Growth of the foreign-born population in the U. (RSMI 71%, U&C 64%, (%) Results by Intention to Treat For satisfaction with physician communication/care, patients randomized to receive RSMI were more likely than those receiving U&C to rate their physicians very well in treating them with respect (71% RSMI vs. 64% U&C, p?p?p?p?p?1194961-19-7 in the RSMI group (RSMI 0.518 vs. U&C trained 0.436, p?p?p?=?0.010). The coefficient in this context means that an encounter utilizing RSMI should lead to a satisfaction score that is 10 points higher out of 100 than the average encounter utilizing PCMI or RCMI with trained interpreters. There were no significant differences between groups in satisfaction with interpreter scores 1194961-19-7 in either the intent-to-treat analysis (Table?4) or in the analysis of actual interpreting method received (Table?5). Table?4 Linear Regression Analysis of Satisfaction with Physician Communication/Care and Satisfaction with Interpretation Scores, Intent-to-treat Analysis Table?5 Linear Regression Analysis of Satisfaction with Physician Communication/Care and Satisfaction with Interpretation Scores, by Actual Interpreting Method Received CONCLUSIONS With the large growth of the foreign-born population in the United States, the study of interpreting strategies outcomes for language-discordant encounters is of great importance. The introduction of RSMI, with its potential for more efficient interpreting because of its simultaneity, compelled studying its impact in relation to U&C interpreting. In this randomized controlled PYST1 trial of RSMI vs. U&C interpreting, there were a few areas in which patients in the RSMI group were more satisfied than in the U&C group. Patients felt they were treated with more respect by their physicians and that their privacy.