Introduction:In this qualitative study, we explored experiences of radiologists and radiation oncologists in providing clinical care to transgender, gender diverse (TGD), and intersex patients by asking about comfort level, relevant past training and training gaps, and clinical recommendations for TGD and intersex patient care. Methods: A purposive sample of radiology and radiation oncology professionals (n = 16) from diverse practice settings were interviewed on a videoconferencing platform. Transcripts were auto-populated and checked manually for accuracy. Two coders used a mix of deductive and inductive coding to identify key themes. Member checking was conducted with interviewees. Results: Participants reported major gaps in training, knowledge, and confidence related to all aspects of TGD and intersex patient care. Recommendations for improvements included training that encompassed key terminology, how to conduct a physical exam on TGD and intersex patients, radiology and radiation oncology adaptations for TGD and intersex patients, and care coordination among multi-disciplinary oncology team members and gender affirming care providers. Exposure to diverse TGD and intersex persons in personal and professional life contributed to higher levels of comfort among providers in caring for TGD and intersex patients. Conclusion: Gaps in knowledge and limited confidence characterized the sample. Training at all levels is needed to improve radiology and radiation oncology care for TGD and intersex patients.
Despite improvements in cancer outcomes over time, significant disparities remain between Black and White cancer survivors. Medical care is estimated to account for 10-20% of health outcomes, while other modifiable factors explain as much as 80-90% of outcomes. These disparities may thus be driven by multiple factors including social determinants of health, differences in treatment or follow up, or attitudes and behaviors of care teams. As part of a larger project, we conducted a qualitative study to understand cancer survivor preferences for and experiences with social needs screening and referrals. The results of this assessment will inform the delivery of social risk screening for breast and prostate cancer survivors in the multi-site study. Semi-structured interviews were conducted in English between March and April 2022 with breast and prostate cancer survivors from two cancer institutes in Washington DC. Patients were purposively recruited to ensure diversity in age, race, and cancer stage (I-III). Each interview lasted 60 minutes. Transcripts were reviewed for consensus and preferences for social needs screening. Thirteen survivors participated in the interviews. Participants were mostly breast cancer survivors (n=10), African American (n=6), were equal in stages I and II at time of diagnosis (n=5), and ranged in age from 34 to 81 with a median age of 64. Most patients (n=7) did not report social needs screening during their treatment, though all patients welcomed having these conversations with their care team. The majority of patients (n=9) desired face-to-face conversations as opposed to on paper (n=1) or through the patient portal (n=1). Similarly, most patients (n=7) did not mind who on their care team held the conversations. There was difference in opinion on how often social needs should be discussed, with four participants suggesting every appointment to another patient suggesting once at diagnosis. When asked about the needs patients experienced during treatment, food insecurity and nutrition were most cited (n=6), followed by transportation (n=4) and emotional resources (n=4). Only one patient reported not desiring social needs referrals during treatment. Other avenues for seeking out social resources included self-initiated research online or through books (n=2), and another patient described utilizing their local church (n=1). Finally, patients also spoke about challenges in receiving treatment and transitioning to survivorship due to the COVID-19 pandemic, including hospital staff turnover and care team inconsistency (n=1), bringing loved ones to appointments (n=1), and transportation challenges for individuals who relied on public transport to and from the clinic (n=1). This research reveals important insight to the perspective on social needs screening among a group of breast and prostate cancer survivors in the Washington DC region and highlights the ways in which patients have experienced and desire screening for social needs. In future work we will expand the number of interviews and apply these findings into practice. Citation Format: Laura C. Schubel, Mandi L. Pratt-Chapman, Teletia Taylor, Robin A. Littlejohn, Andrea J. Lopez, Judith Lee Smith, Susan Sabatino, Arica White, Joseph Astorino, Bryan O. Buckley, Christopher King, Hannah Arem. Preferences for social risk factor screening among breast and prostate cancer survivors in the Washington DC region: A qualitative study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 15th AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2022 Sep 16-19; Philadelphia, PA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2022;31(1 Suppl):Abstract nr B031.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.