A Multi-Institutional Survey of Radiation Oncology Professionals' Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practice Behaviors Toward Sexual and Gender Minority Patients With Cancer

Beck Gold; Pin-Ji Lei; Sophia C Kamran; Daphne A Haas-Kogan; Idalid Franco; Anthony L Zietman; Alicia C Smart; Jennifer Y Wo

doi:10.1016/j.adro.2024.101461

A Multi-Institutional Survey of Radiation Oncology Professionals' Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practice Behaviors Toward Sexual and Gender Minority Patients With Cancer

Adv Radiat Oncol. 2024 Feb 6;9(5):101461. doi: 10.1016/j.adro.2024.101461. eCollection 2024 May.

Authors

Beck Gold¹, Pin-Ji Lei¹, Sophia C Kamran¹, Daphne A Haas-Kogan², Idalid Franco², Anthony L Zietman¹, Alicia C Smart^{1

2}, Jennifer Y Wo¹

Affiliations

¹ Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
² Department of Radiation Oncology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.

Abstract

Purpose: Sexual and gender minority (SGM) individuals have an increased risk of poor health outcomes, in part due to knowledge and training gaps in health care education. This study sought to evaluate the knowledge, attitudes, and practice behaviors of various health care role groups within radiation oncology toward SGM patients.

Methods and materials: A 38-item web-based survey was emailed to 1045 staff across 2 large radiation oncology departments. The survey assessed demographics, attitudes, knowledge, and practice behaviors. χ² tests were performed to explore differences in survey responses by age, political affiliation, religious identity, year since graduation, and role groups. One-way analysis of variance tests were conducted to determine differences between respondents' confidence in knowledge and performance on the knowledge section of the survey. Thematic analysis was applied to the open discussion section.

Results: Of the 223 respondents, 103 clinicians (physicians/advanced practice providers/nurses) and 120 nonclinicians (administrative staff, medical assistants, and other nonmedical staff) participated in the survey (21.3% response rate): 72.6% answered the knowledge questions; 93.5% stated they were comfortable treating sexual minorities, or lesbian, gay, bisexual, and queer + patients; 88% indicated comfort in treating transgender patients; 36.6% stated they were confident in their knowledge of the health needs of transgender patients; and 50.3% expressed confidence in treating lesbian, gay, bisexual, and queer + patients. Fewer nonclinicians than clinicians thought that gender identity, sexual orientation, and sex assigned at birth were important to provide the best care (P < .05). The open comments section identified key themes, including the belief that current educational tools are not helpful, desire for more educational formats (lectures, case-based learning, seminars), and an overall interest in SGM health education.

Conclusions: Most staff feel comfortable in treating SGM patients but are less confident in the distinct needs of this population. Knowledge gaps persist for both clinicians and nonclinicians, indicating a need for further training specific to oncology care.