Sexual minority bariatric patients: preliminary examination of eating behaviors, anxiety, and depression

Sexual orientation moderates the relationship between internalized weight bias and binge eating symptoms among adults pursuing bariatric surgery

BACKGROUND

Sexual minorities have higher rates of anxiety, depression, and binge eating compared to heterosexual peers. Internalized weight bias (IWB) is also higher for sexual minorities when compared to heterosexual peers. However, research has not examined whether the relationships between IWB and anxiety, depression, and binge eating differ among heterosexual and sexual minority adults pursuing bariatric surgery.

OBJECTIVES

To examine whether sexual orientation (heterosexual or sexual minority) moderated the relationships between IWB and anxiety, depression, and binge eating among adults pursuing bariatric surgery.

SETTING

University hospital, United States METHODS: Participants included 811 adults who presented for bariatric surgery, 45 (5.5%) of which identified as a sexual minority. Self-reported data were collected as part of a standard preoperative psychological evaluation for surgical clearance. Three separate moderation models were run to test hypotheses.

RESULTS

Sexual orientation did not moderate the association of IWB with anxiety or depression. The IWB by sexual orientation interaction was significant for binge eating (F 1856) = 4.84, P = .03, R2 = .27 such that the association between IWB and binge eating was significantly stronger for sexual minority patients (b = .54, 95% confidence interval {CI} [.36, .70]), compared to heterosexual patients (b = .33, 95% CI [.30, .38]).

CONCLUSIONS

Minority stress from identifying as a sexual minority may increase vulnerability to binge eating from IWB among bariatric candidates. Future research examining the directionality of the relationship between IWB and binge eating among sexual minorities is warranted.

Confronting the Scope of LGBT Inequity in Surgery

This landmark paper traces anti-LGBT discrimination in surgery from history to present with particular analysis of discrimination against patients, providers, and within faith-based and military While research alone will not end healthcare iniquity, the work cannot begin until the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” era of scholarship on ends. institutions.

Discrimination against marginalized individuals is an epidemic in American Healthcare. Research regarding gender- and race- based discrimination in healthcare and surgery is robust; scholarship on anti-LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender; see Table 1 for explanations of commonly used terms) discrimination is woefully lacking. A Pubmed search of the top 10 Surgical Journals by h-index for the terms “Gay” “Lesbian” “LGBT” or “LGBTQ” turns up a single relevant article (1 ). This is despite the myriad of inequities LGBT surgeons and LGBT surgical patients face. The history of LGBT identity and discrimination has led to inequitable systems at both the structural and interpersonal level which are mutually reinforcing and synergistically harmful to patients (see figure 1 ). Addressing such inequities in surgery will require continual individual, systemic, and structural changes. Delineating all these changes is beyond the scope of any one paper. However, improving and sustaining LGBT equity cannot begin without first providing a common background to create change upon.

This paper seeks to correct the discursive gap.

Surgical Implications of LGBTQ+ Health Disparities: A Review

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer/questioning (LGBTQ+) patients face challenging health care disparities. However, due to restrictions in reporting and collection of sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) demographic data, comprehensive studies of surgical disparities in the LGBTQ+ population are limited. This review aims to summarize the existing literature describing surgical disparities in LGBTQ+ patients and to identify areas of surgical care in which further studies are warranted. This review addresses the literature in infectious diseases, substance use disorders, bariatrics, cardiovascular medicine, oncology, and laryngology as relevant to surgical practice. Understanding the current landscape of knowledge in LGBTQ+ surgical disparities and the areas where gaps in research exist will help the surgeon to create a framework of practice to provide more equitable care to LGBTQ+ patients.