Risks, Benefits, and Importance of Collecting Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Data in Healthcare Settings: A Multi-Method Analysis of Patient and Provider Perspectives

Allysha C. Maragh-Bass, Maya Torain, Rachel Adler, Eric Schneider, Anju Ranjit, Lisa M. Kodadek, Ryan Shields, Danielle German, Claire Snyder, Susan Peterson, Jeremiah Schuur, Brandyn Lau, Adil H. Haider

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Purpose: Research suggests that LGBT populations experience barriers to healthcare. Organizations such as the Institute of Medicine recommend routine documentation of sexual orientation (SO) and gender identity (GI) in healthcare, to reduce LGBT disparities. We explore patient views regarding the importance of SO/GI collection, and patient and provider views on risks and benefits of routine SO/GI collection in various settings. Methods: We surveyed LGBT/non-LGBT patients and providers on their views on SO/GI collection. Weighted data were analyzed with descriptive statistics; content analysis was conducted with open-ended responses. Results: One-half of the 1516 patients and 60% of 429 providers were female; 64% of patients and 71% of providers were White. Eighty percent of providers felt that collecting SO data would offend patients, whereas only 11% of patients reported that they would be offended. Patients rated it as more important for primary care providers to know the SO of all patients compared with emergency department (ED) providers knowing the SO of all patients (41.3% vs. 31.6%; P < 0.001). Patients commonly perceived individualized care as an SO/GI disclosure benefit, whereas providers perceived patient-provider interaction improvement as the main benefit. Patient comments cited bias/discrimination risk most frequently (49.7%; N = 781), whereas provider comments cited patient discomfort/offense most frequently (54.5%; N = 433). Conclusion: Patients see the importance of SO/GI more in primary care than ED settings. However, many LGBT patients seek ED care due to factors including uninsurance; therefore, the ED may represent an initial point of contact for SO/GI collection. Therefore, patient-centered approaches to collecting SO/GI are needed. Patients and providers differed in perceived risks and benefits to routine SO/GI collection. Provider training in LGBT health may address patients' bias/discrimination concerns, and ultimately reduce LGBT health disparities.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)141-152
Number of pages12
JournalLGBT Health
Volume4
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 1 2017

Fingerprint

Sexual Behavior
Delivery of Health Care
Hospital Emergency Service
Primary Health Care
National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine (U.S.) Health and Medicine Division
Health
Disclosure
Emergency Medical Services
Documentation

Keywords

  • Emergency department
  • health disparities
  • LGBT
  • patient-centered care
  • qualitative research
  • quality of care

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Dermatology
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Psychiatry and Mental health
  • Urology

Cite this

Risks, Benefits, and Importance of Collecting Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Data in Healthcare Settings : A Multi-Method Analysis of Patient and Provider Perspectives. / Maragh-Bass, Allysha C.; Torain, Maya; Adler, Rachel; Schneider, Eric; Ranjit, Anju; Kodadek, Lisa M.; Shields, Ryan; German, Danielle; Snyder, Claire; Peterson, Susan; Schuur, Jeremiah; Lau, Brandyn; Haider, Adil H.

In: LGBT Health, Vol. 4, No. 2, 01.04.2017, p. 141-152.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Maragh-Bass, Allysha C. ; Torain, Maya ; Adler, Rachel ; Schneider, Eric ; Ranjit, Anju ; Kodadek, Lisa M. ; Shields, Ryan ; German, Danielle ; Snyder, Claire ; Peterson, Susan ; Schuur, Jeremiah ; Lau, Brandyn ; Haider, Adil H. / Risks, Benefits, and Importance of Collecting Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Data in Healthcare Settings : A Multi-Method Analysis of Patient and Provider Perspectives. In: LGBT Health. 2017 ; Vol. 4, No. 2. pp. 141-152.
@article{5b215c49e6bc41dcb93cbff2ee76c5f2,
title = "Risks, Benefits, and Importance of Collecting Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Data in Healthcare Settings: A Multi-Method Analysis of Patient and Provider Perspectives",
abstract = "Purpose: Research suggests that LGBT populations experience barriers to healthcare. Organizations such as the Institute of Medicine recommend routine documentation of sexual orientation (SO) and gender identity (GI) in healthcare, to reduce LGBT disparities. We explore patient views regarding the importance of SO/GI collection, and patient and provider views on risks and benefits of routine SO/GI collection in various settings. Methods: We surveyed LGBT/non-LGBT patients and providers on their views on SO/GI collection. Weighted data were analyzed with descriptive statistics; content analysis was conducted with open-ended responses. Results: One-half of the 1516 patients and 60{\%} of 429 providers were female; 64{\%} of patients and 71{\%} of providers were White. Eighty percent of providers felt that collecting SO data would offend patients, whereas only 11{\%} of patients reported that they would be offended. Patients rated it as more important for primary care providers to know the SO of all patients compared with emergency department (ED) providers knowing the SO of all patients (41.3{\%} vs. 31.6{\%}; P < 0.001). Patients commonly perceived individualized care as an SO/GI disclosure benefit, whereas providers perceived patient-provider interaction improvement as the main benefit. Patient comments cited bias/discrimination risk most frequently (49.7{\%}; N = 781), whereas provider comments cited patient discomfort/offense most frequently (54.5{\%}; N = 433). Conclusion: Patients see the importance of SO/GI more in primary care than ED settings. However, many LGBT patients seek ED care due to factors including uninsurance; therefore, the ED may represent an initial point of contact for SO/GI collection. Therefore, patient-centered approaches to collecting SO/GI are needed. Patients and providers differed in perceived risks and benefits to routine SO/GI collection. Provider training in LGBT health may address patients' bias/discrimination concerns, and ultimately reduce LGBT health disparities.",
keywords = "Emergency department, health disparities, LGBT, patient-centered care, qualitative research, quality of care",
author = "Maragh-Bass, {Allysha C.} and Maya Torain and Rachel Adler and Eric Schneider and Anju Ranjit and Kodadek, {Lisa M.} and Ryan Shields and Danielle German and Claire Snyder and Susan Peterson and Jeremiah Schuur and Brandyn Lau and Haider, {Adil H.}",
year = "2017",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1089/lgbt.2016.0107",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "4",
pages = "141--152",
journal = "LGBT Health",
issn = "2325-8292",
publisher = "Mary Ann Liebert Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Risks, Benefits, and Importance of Collecting Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Data in Healthcare Settings

T2 - A Multi-Method Analysis of Patient and Provider Perspectives

AU - Maragh-Bass, Allysha C.

AU - Torain, Maya

AU - Adler, Rachel

AU - Schneider, Eric

AU - Ranjit, Anju

AU - Kodadek, Lisa M.

AU - Shields, Ryan

AU - German, Danielle

AU - Snyder, Claire

AU - Peterson, Susan

AU - Schuur, Jeremiah

AU - Lau, Brandyn

AU - Haider, Adil H.

PY - 2017/4/1

Y1 - 2017/4/1

N2 - Purpose: Research suggests that LGBT populations experience barriers to healthcare. Organizations such as the Institute of Medicine recommend routine documentation of sexual orientation (SO) and gender identity (GI) in healthcare, to reduce LGBT disparities. We explore patient views regarding the importance of SO/GI collection, and patient and provider views on risks and benefits of routine SO/GI collection in various settings. Methods: We surveyed LGBT/non-LGBT patients and providers on their views on SO/GI collection. Weighted data were analyzed with descriptive statistics; content analysis was conducted with open-ended responses. Results: One-half of the 1516 patients and 60% of 429 providers were female; 64% of patients and 71% of providers were White. Eighty percent of providers felt that collecting SO data would offend patients, whereas only 11% of patients reported that they would be offended. Patients rated it as more important for primary care providers to know the SO of all patients compared with emergency department (ED) providers knowing the SO of all patients (41.3% vs. 31.6%; P < 0.001). Patients commonly perceived individualized care as an SO/GI disclosure benefit, whereas providers perceived patient-provider interaction improvement as the main benefit. Patient comments cited bias/discrimination risk most frequently (49.7%; N = 781), whereas provider comments cited patient discomfort/offense most frequently (54.5%; N = 433). Conclusion: Patients see the importance of SO/GI more in primary care than ED settings. However, many LGBT patients seek ED care due to factors including uninsurance; therefore, the ED may represent an initial point of contact for SO/GI collection. Therefore, patient-centered approaches to collecting SO/GI are needed. Patients and providers differed in perceived risks and benefits to routine SO/GI collection. Provider training in LGBT health may address patients' bias/discrimination concerns, and ultimately reduce LGBT health disparities.

AB - Purpose: Research suggests that LGBT populations experience barriers to healthcare. Organizations such as the Institute of Medicine recommend routine documentation of sexual orientation (SO) and gender identity (GI) in healthcare, to reduce LGBT disparities. We explore patient views regarding the importance of SO/GI collection, and patient and provider views on risks and benefits of routine SO/GI collection in various settings. Methods: We surveyed LGBT/non-LGBT patients and providers on their views on SO/GI collection. Weighted data were analyzed with descriptive statistics; content analysis was conducted with open-ended responses. Results: One-half of the 1516 patients and 60% of 429 providers were female; 64% of patients and 71% of providers were White. Eighty percent of providers felt that collecting SO data would offend patients, whereas only 11% of patients reported that they would be offended. Patients rated it as more important for primary care providers to know the SO of all patients compared with emergency department (ED) providers knowing the SO of all patients (41.3% vs. 31.6%; P < 0.001). Patients commonly perceived individualized care as an SO/GI disclosure benefit, whereas providers perceived patient-provider interaction improvement as the main benefit. Patient comments cited bias/discrimination risk most frequently (49.7%; N = 781), whereas provider comments cited patient discomfort/offense most frequently (54.5%; N = 433). Conclusion: Patients see the importance of SO/GI more in primary care than ED settings. However, many LGBT patients seek ED care due to factors including uninsurance; therefore, the ED may represent an initial point of contact for SO/GI collection. Therefore, patient-centered approaches to collecting SO/GI are needed. Patients and providers differed in perceived risks and benefits to routine SO/GI collection. Provider training in LGBT health may address patients' bias/discrimination concerns, and ultimately reduce LGBT health disparities.

KW - Emergency department

KW - health disparities

KW - LGBT

KW - patient-centered care

KW - qualitative research

KW - quality of care

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85016396952&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85016396952&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1089/lgbt.2016.0107

DO - 10.1089/lgbt.2016.0107

M3 - Article

C2 - 28221820

AN - SCOPUS:85016396952

VL - 4

SP - 141

EP - 152

JO - LGBT Health

JF - LGBT Health

SN - 2325-8292

IS - 2

ER -