Oncology healthcare providers’ knowledge, attitudes, and practice behaviors regarding LGBT health

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2016.05.004Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Few providers feel informed of LGBTQI patients’ needs.

  • Few providers inquire about patients sexual orientation and gender identity information.

  • Providers are positive towards treating population but require more education regarding needs.

Abstract

Objective

There are limited data on lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) healthcare experiences and interactions with the providers. This study assessed knowledge, attitudes, and practice behaviors of oncology providers regarding LGBT health.

Methods

A 32-item web-based survey was emailed to 388 oncology providers at a single institution. The survey assessed: demographics, knowledge, attitudes, and practice behaviors.

Results

108 providers participated in the survey (28% response rate). <50% answered knowledge questions correctly. 94% stated they were comfortable treating this population. 26% actively inquired about a patient’s sexual orientation when taking a history. 36% felt the need for mandatory education on LGBT cultural competency at the institution. Results from the open comments section identified multiple misconceptions.

Conclusion

This study revealed knowledge gaps about LGBT health risks. Cultural competency training may aid oncology providers to understand the need to inquire about patients’ gender identity and sexual orientation.

Practice implications

Health care providers who incorporate the routine collection of gender identity and sexual orientation (SOGI) in their patient history taking may improve patient care by offering tailored education and referrals. While identifying as LGBT does not in itself increase risk for adverse health outcomes, this population tends to have increased risk behaviors.

Introduction

The lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (LGBT) population is known by a variety of acronyms and nomenclature. Recently, the National Institutes of Health suggested use of the term sexual and gender minority (SGM) [1] as a way to be inclusive of all populations and individuals “whose sexual orientation…is not exclusively heterosexual, [or] whose gender identity differs from the sex assigned to them at birth; [or] who vary from or reject traditional cultural conceptualizations of gender in terms of male-female dichotomy.” [1] SGMs are an understudied and underserved population often disproportionately affected by mental health issues such as depression and social isolation [2]. As such, these mental health issues are correlated with behavioral risk factors such as smoking and obesity, as well as drug and alcohol use that are directly related to increased cancer risk [2], [3], [4]. As a whole, the SGM population may face worse health outcomes due to barriers to care, lack of comfort in disclosing sexual orientation and gender identity which precludes providers from offering appropriate education and counseling for reduction of risk behaviors [5], and prior negative healthcare experiences which may prevent this population from seeking future healthcare [6]. Moreover, SGMs have potentially greater risks for several types of cancer due to their increased prevalence of risk factors and aforementioned behavior [7]. High rates of tobacco use are associated with increased risk of several types of cancer [8]. Multiple studies show higher rates of tobacco use among SGM populations compared to the general population [8], [9], [10]. Increased risk of breast cancer is linked to high rates of smoking, nulliparity, obesity, and alcohol use, all of which are more prevalent in the female SGM populations than the general population [11], [12]. Because of sexual practices such as receptive anal intercourse, men who have sex with men (MSM) are at greater risk of anal cancer as a consequence of oncogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) infection than heterosexual men [13].

Previous research has demonstrated there is limited SGM education in medical schools. For example, a study of 132 medical schools in the US and Canada found the median reported combined hours dedicated to LGBT content was 5 h and 33.3% of these schools reported no required clinical hours for LGBT content [14]. Medical students with increased clinical exposure to LGBT patients had more positive attitudes towards this population and better knowledge of their healthcare concerns compared to students who had no formal training [15].

The 2014 Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) report aimed to improve the LGBT healthcare [16] and suggested providers should be attentive and sensitive to patients’ needs and for physicians to understand “the whole” of a person, including sexual orientation and gender history. Furthermore, the AAMC emphasized the need for cultural competency in the care of LGBT patients with integration of this concept into the medical school curriculum [16]. Additionally, the 2011 Institute of Medicine (IOM) report identified that current research on the LGBT population was sparse [2]. Due to limited research on the education and counseling needs of the community, clinicians may lack resources and information on how best to provide this care to SGM patients [2]. Lack of cultural competency also provides a barrier to addressing the major health concerns of SGM patients. SGM patients who receive care from a provider who is uncomfortable or lacks cultural competency may experience reduced quality of care. Key areas in need of reform, identified by the IOM, are provider attitudes and education [2]. Another limitation of studying LGBT populations is that the majority of cancer registries and medical records have not collected sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) demographic information in the past [17]. However, a decision made by the Department of Health and Human Services in October, 2015, will require those Electronic Health Record (EHR) systems with CEHRT certification to create a platform to begin collecting SOGI in 2016 [18].

A study among elder LGBT patients receiving non-cancer related care suggested difficulty in disclosing SOGI to their providers [19] and poorer health outcomes for patients of all ages who do not disclose sexual orientation [20]. This led us to initiate a study to inquire about the knowledge, attitudes and practice behaviors of providers at a single, National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center regarding LGBTQI patient care. At the time of the survey we used the term LGBTQI (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Questioning, Intersex) to be as inclusive as possible; however this term may not be inclusive of all sexual and gender minority individuals and we note that intersex are not traditionally included as an LGBT population [21]. As such, throughout this article we use the term sexual and gender minority individuals (SGMs) since it is an umbrella term that encompasses LGBT populations, as well as those whose sexual orientation and/or gender identity varies and those who may not self-identify as LGBT such as Queer, Questioning, Two-Spirit, Asexual, and MSM [22].

Section snippets

Study population and survey

The study was deemed exempt (Category 2) by the institutional review board (Liberty IRB, DeLand, FL). The study was conducted at the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL an NCI-designated comprehensive cancer center that serves the population of the state as well as surrounding states and other countries. A link for a 32-item web-based survey was distributed to 388 oncology health care providers by email. Health care providers included all Medical Doctors (MD),

Demographics

One hundred and eight healthcare providers completed the survey for a 28% response rate (Table 1). Nearly 53% of respondents were less than 44 years of age. The majority of respondents identified as non-Hispanic White/Caucasian (62.0%), heterosexual (82.4%), Christian (51.9%), Doctor of Medicine (MD) (64.8%), and graduated from professional school between 2000 and 2009 (47.2%). Nearly 57% of respondents stated that between 1–5% of their patients in the past year had identified themselves as

Discussion

This is one of the first studies to assess knowledge, attitudes, and practice behaviors of healthcare providers in an oncology setting. Overall, knowledge among providers in terms of SGM health was lacking. In half of the questions in the knowledge section less than 50% of respondents were able to identify the correct response. Only 28% said that they were well informed on the health needs of SGM patients. Most providers acknowledged that there needed to be more education on SGM health needs.

Conflict of interest

No competing financial interests exist. Dr. Lancaster’s current affiliation is the Vice President of Medical Affairs at Myriad Genetic Laboratories. When this research was conducted, Dr. Lancaster was a Senior Member at the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute.

Funding

This research was supported by the Scholarly Concentrations Program at USF Health, Morsani College of Medicine and supported in part by the Survey Methods Core Facility at the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute; an NCI designated Comprehensive Cancer Center (P30-CA076292).

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank Ivana Sehovic, MPH, (H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL) for editorial assistance.

References (41)

  • A. Jemal et al.

    Global cancer statistics

    CA Cancer J. Clin.

    (2011)
  • K. Bennett et al.

    A persistent disparity: smoking in rural sexual and gender minorities

    LGBT Health

    (2015)
  • B.A. King et al.

    Current tobacco use among adults in the United States: findings from the National Adult Tobacco Survey

    Am. J. Publ. Health

    (2012)
  • M.D. Althuis et al.

    Etiology of hormone receptor-defined breast cancer: a systematic review of the literature

    Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev.

    (2004)
  • S.D. Cochran et al.

    Risk of breast cancer mortality among women cohabiting with same sex partners: findings from the National Health Interview Survey, 1997–2003

    J. Womens Health (Larchmt)

    (2012)
  • J. Obedin-Maliver et al.

    Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender-related content in undergraduate medical education

    JAMA

    (2011)
  • N.F. Sanchez et al.

    Medical students’ ability to care for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered patients

    Fam. Med.

    (2006)
  • AAMC

    Implementing Curricular and Institutional Climate Changes to Improve Health Care for Individuals Who Are LGBT, Gender Nonconforming, or Born with DSD: A Resource for Medical Educators

    (2014)
  • N. Howlader et al.

    Improved estimates of cancer-specific survival rates from population-based data

    J. Natl. Cancer Inst.

    (2010)
  • The Office for Health Information Technology. 2015 Edition Final Rule: Addressing Health Disparities....
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text