RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) is gaining increased attention within all industries healthcare being no exception. The terminology Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion and its abbreviation EDI gained popularity in the early 2000's when varied socio-political factors prompted many organisations to examine EDI concepts and how to operationalise them. The growing diversity of our society requires cross-cultural inclusive approaches to increase equity and access to services. METHOD: This unique research is community-led research supported by the British Oncology Pharmacy Association, in which the members of the BOPA community are equal partners to inform action on policies that address EDI. This research was a cross-sectional study involving an online survey of financial BOPA members. RESULTS: Demographic data was extracted, and the quotes were analysed for common themes. The majority of respondents were women, and the largest age group was between 34 and 44. The first cause of microaggressions identified by the respondents was of racial and ethnic origin, followed by marital status and religious nature. Participants described the lack of diversity in senior positions and the microaggressions experienced by those who hold leadership positions. Some participants described how some situations at work made them feel excluded or alienated. The impact of discrimination and bullying/microaggressions extended to patients was also reported. CONCLUSION: Despite strategic directions encompassing this aspect, this research underscores the pressing need for more evidence on the lack of EDI in healthcare institutions. Our findings, located in the pharmacy oncology specialty, have identified the problem and highlighted the potential benefits of addressing it. More needs to be done in training and professional development to address unconscious bias and change behaviours.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To examine disparities in attendance rates at cancer screening services between transgender and gender-diverse (TGD) people in comparison with their cisgender (CG) counterparts, and to determine whether these differences were based on the anatomical organ screened. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, EMBASE (via Ovid), CINAHL Complete (via EBSCO) and Cochrane Library from inception to 30 September 2023. METHODS: Studies for inclusion were case-control or cross-sectional studies with quantitative data that investigated TGD adults attending any cancer screening service. Exclusion criteria were studies with participants who were ineligible for cancer screening or without samples from TGD individuals, qualitative data and a cancer diagnosis from symptomatic presentation or incidental findings. A modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess risk of bias, during which seven reports were found incompatible with the inclusion criteria and excluded. Results were synthesised through random-effects meta-analysis and narrative synthesis. RESULTS: We identified 25 eligible records, of which 18 were included in the analysis. These were cross-sectional studies, including retrospective chart reviews and survey analyses, and encompassed over 14.8 million participants. The main outcomes measured were up-to-date (UTD) and lifetime (LT) attendance. Meta-analysis found differences for UTD cervical (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.60, p<0.0001) and mammography (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.87, p=0.02) but not for prostate or colorectal screening. There were no meaningful differences seen in LT attendance based on quantitative synthesis. Narrative synthesis of the seven remaining articles mostly supported the meta-analysis. Reduced rates of screening engagement in TGD participants were found for UTD cervical and mammography screening, alongside LT mammography screening. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with their CG counterparts, TGD individuals had lower rates of using cervical and mammography screening at the recommended frequencies but displayed similar prevalences of LT attendance. The greatest disparity was seen in UTD cervical screening. Limitations of this review included high risk of bias within studies, high heterogeneity and a lack of resources for further statistical testing. Bridging gaps in healthcare to improve cancer screening experiences and outcomes will require consolidated efforts including working with the TGD community. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022368911.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Persistent infection with high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) is the causal agent of several cancers including cervical, anal and oropharyngeal cancer. Transgender men and transmasculine non-binary (TMNB) people with a cervix are much less likely to undergo cervical cancer screening than cisgender women. Transgender women and transfeminine non-binary (TWNB) people assigned male at birth may be at increased risk of HPV. Both TMNB and TWNB people face many barriers to HPV testing including medical mistrust due to stigma and discrimination. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Self-TI Study (Self-TI) is a pilot study designed to measure acceptability and feasibility of HPV self-testing among transgender and non-binary people in England. TMNB people aged 25-65 years, with at least 1 year of testosterone, and TWNB people, aged 18 years and over, are eligible to participate. Participants self-collect up to four samples: an oral rinse, a first void urine sample, a vaginal swab (if applicable) and an anal swab. TMNB participants are asked to have an additional clinician-collected cervical swab taken following their routine Cervical Screening Programme sample. TWNB people are asked to take a self-collection kit to perform additional self-collection at home and mail the samples back to the clinic. Acceptability is assessed by a self-administered online survey and feasibility is measured as the proportion of samples returned in the clinic and from home. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Self-TI received ethical approval from the Research Ethics Committee of Wales 4 and ethical review panel within the Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics at the US National Cancer Institute. Self-TI was coproduced by members of the transgender and non-binary community, who served as authors, collaborators and members of the patient and public involvement (PPI) group. Results of this study will be shared with the community prior to being published in peer-reviewed journals and the PPI group will help to design the results dissemination strategy. The evidence generated from this pilot study could be used to inform a larger, international study of HPV self-testing in the transgender and non-binary community. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05883111.