Assessing how frailty and healthcare delays mediate the association between sexual and gender minority status and healthcare utilization in the All of Us Research Program.

OBJECTIVES: To understand how frailty and healthcare delays differentially mediate the association between sexual and gender minority older adults (OSGM) status and healthcare utilization. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from the All of Us Research Program participants ≥50 years old were analyzed using marginal structural modelling to assess if frailty or healthcare delays mediated OSGM status and healthcare utilization. OSGM status, healthcare delays, and frailty were assessed using survey data. Electronic health record (EHR) data was used to measure the number of medical visits or mental health (MH) visit days, following 12 months from the calculated All of Us Frailty Index. Analyses adjusted for age, race and ethnicity, income, HIV, marital status ± general MH (only MH analyses). RESULTS: Compared to non-OSGM, OSGM adults have higher rates of medical visits (adjusted rate ratio [aRR]: 1.14; 95% CI: 1.03, 1.24) and MH visits (aRR: 1.85; 95% CI: 1.07, 2.91). Frailty mediated the association between OSGM status medical visits (Controlled direct effect [Rcde] aRR: 1.03, 95% CI [0.87, 1.22]), but not MH visits (Rcde aRR: 0.37 [95% CI: 0.06, 1.47]). Delays mediated the association between OSGM status and MH visit days (Rcde aRR: 2.27, 95% CI [1.15, 3.76]), but not medical visits (Rcde aRR: 1.06 [95% CI: 0.97, 1.17]). DISCUSSION: Frailty represents a need for medical care among OSGM adults, highlighting the importance of addressing it to improve health and healthcare utilization disparities. In contrast, healthcare delays are a barrier to MH care, underscoring the necessity of targeted strategies to ensure timely MH care for OSGM adults.

Disparities in cancer incidence by sexual orientation.

INTRODUCTION: Cancer risk factors are more common among sexual minority populations (e.g., lesbian, bisexual) than their heterosexual peers, yet little is known about cancer incidence across sexual orientation groups. METHODS: The 1989-2017 data from the Nurses' Health Study II, a longitudinal cohort of female nurses across the United States, were analyzed (N = 101,543). Sexual orientation-related cancer disparities were quantified by comparing any cancer incidence among four sexual minority groups based on self-disclosure-(1) heterosexual with past same-sex attractions/partners/identity; (2) mostly heterosexual; (3) bisexual; and (4) lesbian women-to completely heterosexual women using age-adjusted incidence rate ratios (aIRR) calculated by the Mantel-Haenszel method. Additionally, subanalyses at 21 cancer disease sites (e.g., breast, colon/rectum) were conducted. RESULTS: For all-cancer analyses, there were no statistically significant differences in cancer incidence at the 5% type I error cutoff among sexual minority groups when compared to completely heterosexual women; the aIRR was 1.17 (95% CI,0.99-1.38) among lesbian women and 0.80 (0.58-1.10) among bisexual women. For the site-specific analyses, incidences at multiple sites were significantly higher among lesbian women compared to completely heterosexual women: thyroid cancer (aIRR, 1.87 [1.03-3.41]), basal cell carcinoma (aIRR, 1.85 [1.09-3.14]), and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (aIRR, 2.13 [1.10-4.12]). CONCLUSION: Lesbian women may be disproportionately burdened by cancer relative to their heterosexual peers. Sexual minority populations must be explicitly included in cancer prevention efforts. Comprehensive and standardized sexual orientation data must be systematically collected so nuanced sexual orientation-related cancer disparities can be accurately assessed for both common and rare cancers.

Sexual and gender minority content in undergraduate medical education in the United States and Canada: current state and changes since 2011.

PURPOSE: To characterize current lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex (LGBTQI +) health-related undergraduate medical education (UME) curricular content and associated changes since a 2011 study and to determine the frequency and extent of institutional instruction in 17 LGBTQI + health-related topics, strategies for increasing LGBTQI + health-related content, and faculty development opportunities. METHOD: Deans of medical education (or equivalent) at 214 allopathic or osteopathic medical schools in Canada and the United States were invited to complete a 36-question, Web-based questionnaire between June 2021 and September 2022. The main outcome measured was reported hours of LGBTQI + health-related curricular content. RESULTS: Of 214 schools, 100 (46.7%) responded, of which 85 (85.0%) fully completed the questionnaire. Compared to 5 median hours dedicated to LGBTQI + health-related in a 2011 study, the 2022 median reported time was 11 h (interquartile range [IQR], 6-16 h, p < 0.0001). Two UME institutions (2.4%; 95% CI, 0.0%-5.8%) reported 0 h during the pre-clerkship phase; 21 institutions (24.7%; CI, 15.5%-33.9%) reported 0 h during the clerkship phase; and 1 institution (1.2%; CI, 0%-3.5%) reported 0 h across the curriculum. Median US allopathic clerkship hours were significantly different from US osteopathic clerkship hours (4 h [IQR, 1-6 h] versus 0 h [IQR, 0-0 h]; p = 0.01). Suggested strategies to increase content included more curricular material focusing on LGBTQI + health and health disparities at 55 schools (64.7%; CI, 54.6%-74.9%), more faculty willing and able to teach LGBTQI + -related content at 49 schools (57.7%; CI, 47.1%-68.2%), and more evidence-based research on LGBTQI + health and health disparities at 24 schools (28.2%; CI, 18.7%-37.8%). CONCLUSION: Compared to a 2011 study, the median reported time dedicated to LGBTQI + health-related topics in 2022 increased across US and Canadian UME institutions, but the breadth, efficacy, or quality of instruction continued to vary substantially. Despite the increased hours, this still falls short of the number of hours based on recommended LGBTQI + health competencies from the Association of American Medical Colleges. While most deans of medical education reported their institutions' coverage of LGBTQI + health as 'fair,' 'good,' or 'very good,' there continues to be a call from UME leadership to increase curricular content. This requires dedicated training for faculty and students.

Gender-Affirming Hormone Therapy and Cervical Cancer Screening Rates in Transgender Men and Nonbinary People: A Cross-Sectional Study from a Boston Community Health Center.

Purpose: Clinical monitoring for patients receiving gender-affirming hormone therapy (GAHT) has the potential to facilitate their receipt of preventive health services. We aimed to determine whether GAHT is associated with increased utilization of cervical cancer screening among transgender men (TM) and nonbinary persons assigned female at birth (NB-AFAB). Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional observational study of a single community health center in Boston. Persons of all gender identities eligible for cervical cancer screening during 2008-2019 were assessed. The outcome of interest was receipt of cervical cancer screening based on U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendations. We compared the proportion of persons who received cervical cancer screening by prescription of GAHT. Results: We identified 13,267 eligible persons. This cohort included 10,547 (79.5%) cisgender women, 1547 (11.7%) TM, and 1173 (8.8%) NB-AFAB persons. Among all persons eligible for cervical cancer screening, TM and NB-AFAB persons were less likely to receive screening than cisgender women (56.2% and 56.1% vs. 60.5% respectively; odds ratio [OR] = 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.75-0.93; OR = 0.84; 95% CI = 0.74-0.94, respectively). Among TM, those prescribed testosterone were more likely to receive cervical cancer screening than those not prescribed testosterone (57.9% vs. 48.2%, OR = 1.47; 95% CI = 1.14-1.92). Among NB-AFAB adults, those prescribed testosterone were more likely to receive cervical cancer screening than those not prescribed testosterone (61.9% vs. 51.5%, OR = 1.53; 95% CI = 1.21-1.93). Conclusions: The benefits of engagement in care to access GAHT may extend beyond the hormonal intervention to preventive health services.

Comparison of faculty and student perceptions of sexual and gender minority content in a preclerkship medical curriculum.

BACKGROUND: Sexual and gender minority (SGM) persons experience stark health disparities. Efforts to mitigate disparities through medical education have met some success. However, evaluations have largely focused on subjective perspectives rather than objective measures. This study aimed to quantify Boston University School of Medicine's sexual and gender minority (SGM) education through surveys of course directors (CDs) and medical students regarding where SGM topics were taught in the preclerkship medical curriculum. Responses were compared to identify concordance between faculty intention and student perceptions regarding SGM education. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was distributed to preclerkship CDs and current medical students in Spring 2019 and 2021, respectively, regarding where in the mandatory preclerkship curriculum CDs deliberately taught and where first- and second-year students recalled having learned 10 SGM topic domains. RESULTS: 64.3% of CDs (n = 18), 47.0% of the first-year class (n = 71), and 67.3% of the second-year class (n = 101) responded to the surveys. Results indicate that, as anticipated, deliberate SGM teaching correlates with greater student recall as students recalled topics that were reported by CDs as intentionally taught at a significantly higher rate compared to those not intentionally taught (32.0% vs. 15.3%; p < 0.01). Students most commonly recalled learning SGM-related language and terminology, which is likely partly but not entirely attributed to curricular modifications and faculty development made between distribution of the faculty and student surveys, indicating the importance of all faculty being trained in appropriate SGM terminology and concepts. Discordance between faculty intention and student recall of when topics were taught reveals opportunities to enhance the intentionality and impact of SGM teaching. CONCLUSIONS: Students perceive and recall SGM content that is not listed as learning objectives, and all faculty who utilize this material in their teachings should receive foundational training and be thoughtful about how information is framed. Faculty who intentionally teach SGM topics should be explicit and direct about the conclusions they intend students to draw from their curricular content.