Prevalence of Developmental Delay and Contributing Factors Among Children With Sickle Cell Disease.

BACKGROUND: Children with sickle cell disease (SCD) are at higher risk for deficits in cognition compared to the general population, even at young ages. Disease severity has been co-assessed in earlier studies, but the home environment has not. The purpose of the current study was to investigate the development of young children with SCD and secondarily, the impact of environmental and family factors. METHODS: The current study is a baseline cross-sectional evaluation of a prospective, single-center cohort. Children with SCD between the ages of 1 and 42 months and their primary caregiver were included. Participants lived within 30 miles of the site and spoke English. Children underwent developmental evaluation using the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, Third Edition (BSID-III). Home visits were completed and screened using the Home Observation for Measurement of the Environment (HOME). RESULTS: Over 3 years, 43 caregiver-child dyads consented and participated. Over 50% of children scored significantly below average on cognition and expressive language subscales. SCD severity was not associated with BSID-III scores. Socioeconomic status (SES) determined by the Diez-Roux method positively correlated (r = 0.401, P < 0.01) with the home environment. The HOME correlated (r = 0.360, P < 0.05) with the cognitive subscale on the BSID-III. CONCLUSIONS: Given the high prevalence of developmental delay in this population, identifying modifiable factors to maximize developmental progress is essential. The home environment would be a targeted method for intervention. Future research is needed to identify the benefits of home-based intervention for this population.

Gay Acres: Sexual Orientation Differences in Health Indicators Among Rural and Nonrural Individuals.

PURPOSE: Geographic location is a significant factor that influences health status and health disparities. Yet, little is known about the relationship between geographic location and health and health disparities among lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) persons. This study used a US population-based sample to evaluate the associations of sexual orientation with health indicators by rural/nonrural residence. METHODS: Data were pooled from the 10 states that collected sexual orientation in the 2010 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System surveys. Rural status was defined using metropolitan statistical area, and group differences by sexual orientation were stratified by gender and rural/nonrural status. Chi-square tests for categorical variables were used to assess bivariate relationships. Multivariable logistic regression models stratified by gender and rural/nonrural status were used to assess the association of sexual orientation to health indicators, while adjusting for age, race/ethnicity, education, and partnership status. All analyses were weighted to adjust for the complex sampling design. FINDINGS: Significant differences between LGB and heterosexual participants emerged for several health indicators, with bisexuals having a greater number of differences than gay men/lesbians. There were fewer differences in health indicators for rural LGB participants compared to heterosexuals than nonrural participants. CONCLUSIONS: Rural residence appears to influence the pattern of LGB health disparities. Future work is needed to confirm and identify the exact etiology or rural/nonrural differences in LGB health.

Health Behaviors and Self-Reported Health Among Cancer Survivors by Sexual Orientation.

PURPOSE: Health behaviors and self-reported health are important for understanding cancer survivor health. However, there is a paucity of published research about how cancer survivors' health behaviors and self-rated health vary by sexual orientation. This study examined cancer survivors' health behaviors and self-reported health by sexual orientation. METHODS: This study used data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) from 2001-2010. Self-reported health and cancer-related health behaviors were compared by sexual orientation. Propensity score adjustment was used to account for differences in age, race, education, gender and health insurance status. RESULTS: Of the 602 survivors eligible for the study, 4.3% identified as sexual minorities. Sexual minorities were 2.6 times more likely to report a history of illicit drug use (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=2.4, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.04, 5.35), and 60% less likely to report their current health status as good (aOR=0.40, 95% CI: 0.18, 0.89), compared to heterosexual cancer survivors. These disparities persisted even after adjustment for socio-demographic characteristics. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that sexual minority cancer survivors may be at greater risk for poorer outcomes after cancer than other survivors. A possible explanation for the observed differences involves minority stress. Future research should test stress as an explanation for these differences. However, using population-methods to achieve this goal requires larger samples of lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) cancer survivors.

Operational Definitions of Sexual Orientation and Estimates of Adolescent Health Risk Behaviors.

PURPOSE: Increasing attention to the health of lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) populations comes with requisite circumspection about measuring sexual orientation in surveys. However, operationalizing these variables also requires considerable thought. This research sought to document the consequences of different operational definitions of sexual orientation by examining variation in health risk behaviors. METHODS: Using Massachusetts Youth Risk Behavior Survey data, we examined how operational definitions of sexual behavior and sexual identity influenced differences among three health behaviors known to disparately affect LGB populations: smoking, suicide risk, and methamphetamine use. Sexual behavior and sexual identity were also examined together to explore if they captured unique sources of variability in behavior. RESULTS: Estimates of health disparities changed as a result of using either sexual behavior or sexual identity. Youth who reported their sexual identity as "not sure" also had increased odds of health risk behavior. Disaggregating bisexual identity and behavior from same-sex identity and behavior frequently resulted in the attenuation or elimination of health disparities that would have otherwise been attributable to exclusively same-sex sexual minorities. Finally, sexual behavior and sexual identity explained unique and significant sources of variability in all three health behaviors. CONCLUSION: Researchers using different operational definitions of sexual orientation could draw different conclusions, even when analyzing the same data, depending upon how they chose to represent sexual orientation in analyses. We discuss implications that these manipulations have on data interpretation and provide specific recommendations for best-practices when analyzing sexual orientation data collected from adolescent populations.

Stress mediates the relationship between sexual orientation and behavioral risk disparities.

BACKGROUND: Growing evidence documents elevated behavioral risk among sexual-minorities, including gay, lesbian, and bisexual individuals; however, tests of biological or psychological indicators of stress as explanations for these disparities have not been conducted. METHODS: Data were from the 2005-2010 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, and included 9662 participants; 9254 heterosexuals, 153 gays/lesbians and 255 bisexuals. Associations between sexual orientation and tobacco, alcohol, substance, and marijuana use, and body mass index, were tested using the chi-square test. Stress, operationalized as depressive symptoms and elevated C-reactive protein, was tested as mediating the association between sexual orientation and behavioral health risks. Multiple logistic regression was used to test for mediation effects, and the Sobel test was used to evaluate the statistical significance of the meditating effect. RESULTS: Gays/lesbians and bisexuals were more likely to report current smoking (p < .001), a lifetime history of substance use (p < .001), a lifetime history of marijuana use (p < .001), and a lifetime period of risky drinking (p = .0061). The largest disparities were observed among bisexuals. Depressive symptoms partially mediated the association between sexual orientation and current smoking (aOR 2.04, 95% CI 1.59, 2.63), lifetime history of substance use (aOR 3.30 95% CI 2.20, 4.96), and lifetime history of marijuana use (aOR 2.90, 95% CI 2.02, 4.16), among bisexuals only. C-reactive protein did not mediate the sexual orientation/behavior relationship. CONCLUSION: Higher prevalence of current smoking and lifetime history of substance use was observed among sexual minorities compared to heterosexuals. Among bisexuals, depressive symptoms accounted for only 0.9-3% of the reduction in the association between sexual orientation and marijuana use and tobacco use, respectively. More comprehensive assessments of stress are needed to inform explanations of the disparities in behavioral risk observed among sexual minorities.

Health inequalities among sexual minority adults: evidence from ten U.S. states, 2010.

BACKGROUND: Improving the health of lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) individuals is a Healthy People 2020 goal; however, the IOM highlighted the paucity of information currently available about LGB populations. PURPOSE: To compare health indicators by gender and sexual orientation statuses. METHODS: Data are from Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System surveys conducted January-December of 2010 with population-based samples of non-institutionalized U.S. adults aged over 18 years (N=93,414) in ten states that asked about respondents' sexual orientation (response rates=41.1%-65.6%). Analyses were stratified by gender and sexual orientation to compare indicators of mental health, physical health, risk behaviors, preventive health behaviors, screening tests, health care utilization, and medical diagnoses. Analyses were conducted in March 2013. RESULTS: Overall, 2.4% (95% CI=2.2, 2.7) of the sample identified as LGB. All sexual minority groups were more likely to be current smokers than their heterosexual peers. Compared with heterosexual women, lesbian women had more than 30% decreased odds of having an annual routine physical exam, and bisexual women had more than 2.5 times the odds of not seeking medical care owing to cost. Compared with heterosexual men, gay men were less likely to be overweight or obese, and bisexual men were twice as likely to report a lifetime asthma diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: This study represents one of the largest samples of LGB adults and finds important health inequalities, including that bisexual women bear particularly high burdens of health disparities. Further work is needed to identify causes of and intervention for these disparities.

A population-based study of cardiovascular disease risk in sexual-minority women.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine if sexual-minority women were at greater risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD) than their heterosexual counterparts. METHODS: We aggregated data from the 2001-2008 National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys to examine differences in CVD risk between heterosexual and sexual-minority women by using the Framingham General CVD Risk Score to calculate a ratio of vascular and chronological age. We also examined differences in the prevalence of various CVD risk factors. RESULTS: Sexual-minority women were more likely to be current or former smokers, to report a history of drug use, to report risky drinking, and to report a family history of CVD. On average, sexual-minority women were 13.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 8.5%, 19.3%) older in vascular terms than their chronological age, which was 5.7% (95% CI = 1.5%, 9.8%) greater than that of their heterosexual counterparts. Family history of CVD and history of drug use were unrelated to increased CVD risk, and this risk was not fully explained by either risky drinking or smoking. CONCLUSIONS: Sexual-minority women are at increased risk for CVD compared with heterosexual women.

CVD risk among men participating in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) from 2001 to 2010: differences by sexual minority status.

BACKGROUND: Recent research indicates that sexual minority women are at increased risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD) compared with heterosexual women; however, few studies of CVD risk exist for sexual minority men (SMM). This study aimed to determine whether disparities in CVD risk exist for SMM and if CVD risk is consistent across subgroups of SMM. METHODS: This study utilised publicly available data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), pooled from 2001 to 2010. CVD risk was calculated using the Framingham General CVD Risk Score and operationalised as the ratio of a participant's vascular and chronological age. Differences in this ratio were examined between heterosexual and SMM as a whole, and within subgroups of SMM. RESULTS: SMM had vascular systems that were, on average, 4% (95% CI -7.5% to -0.4%) younger than their heterosexual counterparts; however, adjustment for education and history of hard drug use rendered this difference statistically insignificant. Analysis of SMM subgroups revealed increased CVD risk for bisexual men and decreased CVD risk for both gay and homosexually experienced heterosexual men when compared with heterosexual men. Differences in CVD risk persisted for only bisexual and homosexually experienced heterosexual men after adjustment for education and history of hard drug use. CONCLUSIONS: Subgroups of SMM are at increased risk for CVD compared with heterosexual men, and this increased risk cannot be completely attributed to differences in demographic characteristics or negative health behaviours.