Healthcare Mistreatment, State-Level Policy Protections, and Healthcare Avoidance Among Gender Minority People.

Introduction: This study examined whether past experiences of mistreatment in healthcare were associated with greater healthcare avoidance due to anticipated mistreatment among gender minority (GM) people. We evaluated whether state-level healthcare policy protections moderated this relationship. Methods: Data from the 2018 Annual Questionnaire of The PRIDE Study, a national longitudinal study on sexual and gender minority people's health, were used in these analyses. Logistic regression modeling tested relationships between lifetime healthcare mistreatment due to gender identity or expression and past-year healthcare avoidance due to anticipated mistreatment among GM participants. Interactions between lifetime healthcare mistreatment and state-level healthcare policy protections and their relationship with past-year healthcare avoidance were tested. Results: Participants reporting any lifetime healthcare mistreatment had greater odds of past-year healthcare avoidance due to anticipated mistreatment among gender expansive people (n = 1290, OR = 4.71 [CI]: 3.57-6.20), transfeminine people (n = 263, OR = 10.32 [CI]: 4.72-22.59), and transmasculine people (n = 471, OR = 3.90 [CI]: 2.50-6.13). Presence of state-level healthcare policy protections did not moderate this relationship in any study groups. Conclusions: For GM people, reporting lifetime healthcare mistreatment was associated with healthcare avoidance due to anticipated mistreatment. State-level healthcare policy protections were not a moderating factor in this relationship. Efforts to evaluate the implementation and enforcement of state-level policies are needed. Continued efforts to understand instances of and to diminish healthcare mistreatment of GM people are recommended. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13178-022-00748-1.

Integrating LGBTQ+ health into medical education.

BACKGROUND: LGBTQ+ people experience significant barriers in accessing health care including inadequate provider knowledge and stigma in health care settings. Undergraduate medical education programs have increased efforts to integrate LGBTQ+ health topics, such as comprehensive sexual history taking and gender-affirming practices, into their curriculums to provide clinically inclusive care for LGBTQ+ patients. APPROACH: A Topic Steward was appointed to oversee the integration of LGBTQ+ health topics throughout the existing undergraduate medical curriculum. The aim was to expand the LGBTQ+ health curriculum for undergraduate medical students through teaching comprehensive sexual history taking; offering specialty-specific LGBTQ+ health education through clerkships; describing the difference between sex assigned at birth, gender identity, and gender expression; describing the difference between sexual orientation and sexual behaviour; identifying health care disparities that LGBTQ+ people experience; and developing an inclusive approach to providing medical care for LGBTQ+ patients. EVALUATION: The program started in July 2017 with UCSFSOM students in their first, second, or third years (~150 medical students per year) participating in the integrated curriculum that included didactic lectures, small group discussions, and LGBTQ+ clerkship opportunities. The hours of LGBTQ+ health curriculum at the UCSFSOM increased from 4.5 hours to 15-20 hours in approximately 2 years under the Topic Steward approach. IMPLICATIONS: The next step is to develop standardised tools for assessing LGBTQ+ health competencies for medical students. This involves integrating more questions regarding LGBTQ+ health topics in traditional exams at UCSFSOM and developing specialty-specific assessment instruments that other medical schools could administer to test core competencies in LGBTQ+ health.

Simulation Training in Early Emergency Response (STEER).

HOW TO OBTAIN CONTACT HOURS BY READING THIS ISSUE Instructions: 1.3 contact hours will be awarded by Villanova University College of Nursing upon successful completion of this activity. A contact hour is a unit of measurement that denotes 60 minutes of an organized learning activity. This is a learner-based activity. Villanova University College of Nursing does not require submission of your answers to the quiz. A contact hour certificate will be awarded after you register, pay the registration fee, and complete the evaluation form online at http://goo.gl/gMfXaf. In order to obtain contact hours you must: 1. Read the article, "Simulation Training in Early Emergency Response (STEER)," found on pages 255-263, carefully noting any tables and other illustrative materials that are included to enhance your knowledge and understanding of the content. Be sure to keep track of the amount of time (number of minutes) you spend reading the article and completing the quiz. 2. Read and answer each question on the quiz. After completing all of the questions, compare your answers to those provided within this issue. If you have incorrect answers, return to the article for further study. 3. Go to the Villanova website to register for contact hour credit. You will be asked to provide your name, contact information, and a VISA, MasterCard, or Discover card number for payment of the $20.00 fee. Once you complete the online evaluation, a certificate will be automatically generated. This activity is valid for continuing education credit until May 31, 2019. CONTACT HOURS This activity is co-provided by Villanova University College of Nursing and SLACK Incorporated. Villanova University College of Nursing is accredited as a provider of continuing nursing education by the American Nurses Credentialing Center's Commission on Accreditation. OBJECTIVES Define the purpose of the Simulation Training in Early Emergency Response (STEER) study. Review the outcome of the STEER study. DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Neither the planners nor the author have any conflicts of interest to disclose. Little has been published about nurses' responses in the first 5 minutes of in-hospital emergencies. This study aimed to test a simulation curriculum based on institutional priorities using high-intensity, short-duration, frequent in situ content delivery based on deliberate practice. The study design was a prospective, single-center, mixed-methods quasi-experimental study. Scenarios used in this study were ventricular fibrillation, opiate-related respiratory depression, syncopal fall, and hemorrhagic stroke. The convenience sample included 41 teams (147 participants). Improvements were noted in initiating chest compressions (p = .018), time to check blood glucose (p = .046), and identification of heparin as a contributor to stroke (p = .043). Establishing in situ simulation-based teaching program is feasible and well received. This approach appears effective in increasing confidence, initiating life-saving measures, and empowering nurses to manage emergencies. Future studies should evaluate and improve on the curriculum, on data collection tools quantitatively, and on overcoming barriers to high-quality emergency care. J Contin Educ Nurs. 2016;47(6):255-263.