In this paper, we present a study comparing two mediums that can be used to communicate with allophone patients: a speech-enabled phraselator (BabelDr) and telephone interpreting. To identify the satisfaction provided by these mediums and their pros and cons, we conducted a crossover experiment where doctors and standardized patients completed anamneses and filled in surveys. Our findings suggest that telephone interpreting offers better overall satisfaction, but both mediums presented advantages. Consequently, we argue BabelDr and telephone interpreting can be complementary.