Interactions Between Health Professionals and Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Patients in Healthcare Settings: A Systematic Review

Embracing Spectrum: Celebrating LGBTQIA+ Journeys in Aesthetic Medicine: A Kaleidoscope of Identity

PURPOSE

This synaptic systemised review critically examines the provision of aesthetic medical care to LGBTQIA+ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer or questioning, intersex, asexual, and more) individuals, assessing both the clinical practices and the educational frameworks that guide interactions with LGBTQIA+ patients in aesthetic settings.

METHODS

Following PRISMA-S guidelines, a comprehensive review was conducted, initially identifying 159 potentially relevant articles. Upon stringent full-text review, 33 studies met the inclusion criteria and were subject to an in-depth thematic analysis. The scope encompassed qualitative studies, quantitative analyses, and a cross section of interdisciplinary research, predominantly from Western settings.

RESULTS

The analysis distilled four principal themes: the imperative of identity affirmation in aesthetic interventions, substantial barriers to inclusive and empathetic care, the critical need for patient empowerment, and the existing deficiencies within medical education regarding LGBTQIA+ care. These themes highlight a complex interplay between the clinical aspirations of LGBTQIA+ individuals and the current capacity of aesthetic medicine to cater to this diversity.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a pressing need for a paradigmatic shift towards more inclusive, competent, and sensitive aesthetic medical care for LGBTQIA+ patients. It underscores the necessity of reform in medical education and advocates for policy changes that promote a more equitable healthcare environment. This research serves as a call to action, emphasizing the ethical imperative to integrate comprehensive LGBTQIA+ care competencies into aesthetic medicine curricula and practice.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.

Podcast on the Challenges and Recommendations to Address Unmet Needs in MS for LGBTQ+ Populations in the United States

In general, individuals who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer or questioning, plus other identities (LGBTQ+) living with multiple sclerosis (MS) have less favorable healthcare experiences and poorer overall health than cisgendered heterosexual individuals. They may experience further challenges in addition to managing their MS, including psychological or emotional problems, and an increased risk of comorbid diseases and substance abuse. Transgender individuals specifically face additional unique challenges, including high rates of mental health distress and effects from long-term exogenous hormone use and gender affirmation surgery. These findings highlight disparities in both quality of care and health outcomes of LGBTQ+ individuals. Unmet needs and drivers of these disparities relate to a lack of inclusivity in healthcare environments, poor communication between healthcare professionals (HCPs) and LGBTQ+ patients, inadequate HCP knowledge of LGBTQ+ health issues, and gaps in research into the impact of sexual orientation and gender identity in MS. Although data are limited, recommendations to improve the experience and care of LGBTQ+ individuals with MS include increasing HCP awareness of the challenges LGBTQ+ individuals face and provision of inclusive care, with the overarching goal for HCPs to be allies to the LGBTQ+ community. Improvements may be achieved through diversity and cultural awareness training of HCPs on sexual orientation and gender identity, and ensuring a friendly, open, and supportive healthcare environment. Use of sensitive and gender-neutral language by HCPs, representation of LGBTQ+ individuals in patient materials, and access to LGBTQ+ MS support groups are also recommended. HCPs should aim to integrate discussion of sexual orientation and gender identity and sexual and mental health into routine assessments and collaborate with other HCPs as needed. By addressing the challenges and unmet needs of LGBTQ+ individuals with MS, this should help resolve disparities in their quality of care and improve their overall health.

Primary Healthcare Nurse’s Barriers and Facilitators to Providing Sexual and Reproductive Healthcare Services of LGBTQI Individuals: A Qualitative Study

In most cases, we only hear Lesbians, Gays, Bisexuals, Transgender, Queer, and Intersex (LGBTQI) patients complaining about nurses being the reason for not accessing and utilizing healthcare services; for example, studies reports on the different attitudes of healthcare providers including nurses against LGBTQI patients. However, factors influencing the behavior of South African Primary Healthcare (PHC) Nurses toward LGBTQI patients are rarely reported. The study aimed to explore how PHC nurses experienced and perceived sexual and reproductive health services for LGBTQI individuals in Tshwane, Gauteng Province, South Africa. The study followed qualitative research using an exploratory design approach. The sample included 27 PHC nurses from Tshwane, Gauteng Province, South Africa. In-depth face-to-face interviews were coded and analyzed using Thematic Content Analysis (TCA) which included five interrelated steps. The results revealed three main themes: barriers to the provision of LGBTQI-related SRHS, facilitators for the provision of SRHS to LGBTQI individuals, and strategies to improve LGBTQI individuals’ SRHS accessibility and availability. Common barriers were related to the institutions, PHC nurses, the general public, and LGBTQI patients themselves. Regardless of the challenges faced by PHC nurses, there were some enabling factors that pushed them to continue rendering SHRS to LGBTQI patients who came to their clinics. Almost all PHC nurses suggested the importance of awareness, transparency, collaboration, and the need for training related to LGBTQI healthcare issues.

“I need more knowledge”: Qualitative analysis of oncology providers’ experiences with sexual and gender minority patients

Background

While societal acceptance for sexual and gender minority (SGM) individuals is increasing, this group continues to face barriers to quality healthcare. Little is known about clinicians’ experiences with SGM patients in the oncology setting. To address this, a mixed method survey was administered to members of the ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group.

Materials and methods

We report results from the open-ended portion of the survey. Four questions asked clinicians to describe experiences with SGM patients, reservations in caring for them, suggestions for improvement in SGM cancer care, and additional comments. Data were analyzed using content analysis and the constant comparison method.

Results

The majority of respondents noted they had no or little familiarity with SGM patients. A minority of respondents noted experience with gay and lesbian patients, but not transgender patients; many who reported experience with transgender patients also noted difficulty navigating the correct use of pronouns. Many respondents also highlighted positive experiences with SGM patients. Suggestions for improvement in SGM cancer care included providing widespread training, attending to unique end-of-life care issues among SGM patients, and engaging in efforts to build trust.

Conclusion

Clinicians have minimal experiences with SGM patients with cancer but desire training. Training the entire workforce may improve trust with, outreach efforts to, and cancer care delivery to the SGM community.

The impact of sources of stigma on health care avoidance among gay and bisexual men in Australia

Stigma has a negative impact on health and wellbeing for gay and bisexual men (GBM). There is little research which assesses whether stigma from various sources affects access to different health care services. Further, those people who pay more attention to their stigmatised condition may be more likely to avoid health services. This study aimed to assess the association between sources of stigma and health care avoidance amongst a sample of GBM, as well as the role of heightened stigma sensitivity. The sample consisted of 1116 GBM in Australia who completed an online survey. Findings illustrate that those reporting any stigma were more likely to avoid health care services, while avoiding different types of health care was related to the source of the stigma. Greater stigma sensitivity was associated with avoidance of all health care services. GBM may come to health services with complex and potentially recurrent experiences of stigma. Working on the assumption that clients have a history of negative experiences in health care will increase the ability of services to work sensitively with GBM clients and ensure that access to health care amongst this group is increased.