Cancer patient and provider responses to companion scales assessing experiences with LGBTQI-affirming healthcare.

Background: Sexual and gender minority (SGM) persons are at a higher risk for some cancers and may have poorer health outcomes as a result of ongoing minority stress, social stigma, and cisnormative, heteronormative healthcare environments. This study compared patient and provider experiences of affirming environmental and behavioral cues and also examined provider-reported knowledge, attitudes, behaviors, and clinical preparedness in caring for SGM patients among a convenience sample. Methods: National convenience samples of oncology providers (n = 107) and patients (n = 88) were recruited separately via snowball sampling. No incentives were provided. After reverse coding of appropriate items for unidirectional analysis, lower scores on items indicated greater knowledge, more affirming attitudes or behaviors, and greater confidence in clinical preparedness to care for SGM patients. Pearson chi-square tests compared dichotomous variables and independent samples t-tests compared continuous variables. Other results were reported using descriptive frequencies. Results: Both patient and provider samples were predominantly female sex assigned at birth, cisgender, and heterosexual. Providers were more likely than patients to report affirming cues in clinic, as well as the ability for patients to easily document their name in use and pronouns. Providers were more likely to report asking about patient values and preferences of care versus patients' recollection of being asked. Patients were more likely to report understanding why they were asked about both sex assigned at birth and gender identity compared to providers' perceptions that patients would understand being asked about both. Patients were also more likely to report comfort with providers asking about sex assigned at birth and gender identity compared to providers' perceptions of patient comfort. SGM providers had greater knowledge of SGM patient social determinants of health and cancer risks; felt more prepared to care for gay patients; were more likely to endorse the importance of knowing patient sexual orientation and gender identity; and were more likely to indicate a responsibility to learn about SGM patient needs and champion positive system changes for SGM patients compared to heterosexual/cisgender peers. Overall, providers wished for more SGM-specific training. Conclusion: Differences between patient and provider reports of affirming environments as well as differences between SGM and heterosexual/cisgender provider care support the need for expanded professional training specific to SGM cancer care.

Advancing Patient-Centered Cancer Survivorship Care: Evaluation of a Dissemination Project.

Care coordination among primary care providers and oncologists continues to be a challenge in cancer survivorship care. The Advancing Patient-Centered Cancer Survivorship Care Toolkit ("Toolkit") was developed to provide a "workshop in a box" for comprehensive cancer control (CCC) stakeholders to advance patient-centered cancer survivorship care in their region. The Toolkit was disseminated through an e-learning module, established webpages, an online forum, and social media. Toolkit dissemination was evaluated using the RE-AIM framework. For effectiveness, e-learning module and workshop participants were surveyed to assess changes in confidence in learning objectives. The Toolkit Web page received over 10,000 impressions. E-learning module participants (n = 212) reported statistically significant improvement (p < 0.001) between the pre- (M = 3.42, SD = 0.85) and post-test (M = 4.18, SD = 0.60) mean scores on self-confidence to describe patient-reported priorities for cancer survivorship care. Among virtual workshop trainees (n = 121), 28 participants completed paired pre- and post-workshop surveys. Among those with matched responses, there were statistically significant improvements from pre- to post-workshop self-reported knowledge on what patients want in cancer survivorship care (M = 2.5, SD = 1.0, vs. M = 3.3, SD = 1.0; p = 0.001); confidence in describing critical components of patient-centered cancer survivorship care (M = 3.1, SD = 1.2, vs. M = 4.2, SD = 0.5; p < 0.001); and confidence in describing patient priorities for cancer survivorship care (M = 3.0, SD = 1.1, vs. M = 4.1, SD = 0.6; p < 0.001). Provision of technical assistance resources in a variety of formats can successfully build capacity of healthcare providers and comprehensive cancer coalition stakeholders to feel more prepared to deliver patient-centered, coordinated cancer survivorship care.

Technical Assistance and Training Needs of Comprehensive Cancer Control Programs: a Qualitative Analysis.

The National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program (NCCCP) was established in 1998 by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to advance national cancer control implementation across US states and affiliated tribes and territories. To build capacity of NCCCP recipients, technical assistance and training (TAT) is offered in the form of online trainings, webinars, toolkits, workshops, tip sheets, and other products. To determine TAT needs of NCCCP recipients, the George Washington University (GW) Cancer Center conducted a qualitative evaluation to inform TAT planning and implementation. Data on the utilization, applicability, impact, and dissemination of TAT received were collected from comprehensive cancer control practitioners through semi-structured interviews. Detailed memos of interviewee responses were documented and deductively coded based on three themes: promotion of TAT, use of existing TAT, and recommendations for future TAT. Interviewees reported a need for diverse topics, modalities, and TAT reminders. The most widely used TAT resources were social media toolkits, webinars, newsletters, patient navigation resources, and online trainings. Recommendations for future TAT included a focus on coalition support, adaptation and evaluation of evidence-based cancer control strategies, and health equity. Offering a blend of TAT, including educational webinars and trainings, was preferred by CCC professionals and could increase use. Future TAT will provide new opportunities for coalition capacity building, adaptation of evidence-based strategies for cancer control, and center health equity.

"When the pain is so acute or if I think that I'm going to die": Health care seeking behaviors and experiences of transgender and gender diverse people in an urban area.

INTRODUCTION: Approximately 1.4 million transgender and gender diverse (TGD) adults in the United States have unique health and health care needs, including anatomy-driven cancer screening. This study explored the general healthcare experiences of TGD people in the Washington, DC area, and cancer screening experiences in particular. METHODS: Twenty-one TGD people were recruited through word of mouth and Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Queer (LGBTQ)-specific community events. Participant interviews were conducted and recorded via WebEx (n = 20; one interview failed to record). Interviews were transcribed using Rev.com. Two coders conducted line-by-line coding for emergent themes in NVivo 12, developed a codebook by consensus, and refined the codebook throughout the coding process. Member checking was conducted to ensure credibility of findings. RESULTS: Three major themes served as parent nodes: health-care seeking behaviors, quality care, and TGD-specific health care experiences. Within these parent nodes there were 14 child nodes and 4 grand-child nodes. Subthemes for health care seeking behaviors included coverage and costs of care, convenience, trust/mistrust of provider, and provider recommendations for screening. Subthemes for quality of care included professionalism, clinical competence in transgender care, care coordination, provider communication, and patient self-advocacy. Overall, transgender men were less satisfied with care than transgender women. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest a need for improved provider communication skills, including clear explanations of procedures and recommendations for appropriate screenings to TGD patients. Results also suggest a need for improved clinical knowledge and cultural competency. Respondents also wanted better care coordination and insurance navigation. Overall, these findings can inform health care improvements for TGD people.

"You Have to Keep a Roof Over Your Head": A Qualitative Study of Housing Needs Among Patients With Cancer in New York City.

PURPOSE: Housing status can become compromised in the wake of financial hardship for some patients with cancer and become a source of disparity. This qualitative study describes the types of housing issues experienced by patients with cancer and survivors of cancer in New York City. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted with a volunteer sample of 21 patients with cancer or survivors of cancer treated in New York City who reported housing needs in the period after diagnosis through survivorship. Nine supplemental interviews were conducted with cancer and housing key informants. Conventional content analysis was conducted on transcripts to create a codebook describing types of housing needs. RESULTS: Patients and survivors most commonly had breast (n = 9) and blood (n = 4) cancers and ranged from recently diagnosed to many years posttreatment. Twenty-nine distinct housing-related issues were identified, which were grouped into the following six major categories: housing costs (eg, rent, mortgage), home loss, doubled up or unstable housing, housing conditions, accessibility (eg, stairs, proximity to amenities), and safety. Issues were often interrelated. Housing needs sometimes predated cancer diagnosis. Other issues newly emerged in the wake of cancer-related physical limitations and disruption to finances. Needs ranged in severity and caused patients and survivors considerable burden during a difficult period of poor health and financial strain. CONCLUSION: This study contributes depth to current understandings of housing needs among patients with cancer and survivors by providing detailed disaggregated descriptions. We recommend increasing availability of services responsive to these needs and exploring promising options such as patient navigation and legal services. Findings also highlight the importance of creative solutions addressing ecologic-level factors such as housing affordability.