Challenges in collecting information on sexual orientation and gender identity for cancer patients: perspectives of hospital and central cancer registry abstractors.

PURPOSE: Sexual and gender minority (SGM) populations experience cancer treatment and survival disparities; however, inconsistent sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) data collection within clinical settings and the cancer surveillance system precludes population-based research toward health equity for this population. This qualitative study examined how hospital and central registry abstractors receive and interact with SOGI information and the challenges that they face in doing so. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 18 abstractors at five Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registries, as well as seven abstractors from commission on cancer (CoC)-accredited hospital programs in Iowa. Interviews were transcribed, cleaned, and coded using a combination of a priori and emergent codes. These codes were then used to conduct a descriptive analysis and to identify domains across the interviews. RESULTS: Interviews revealed that abstractors had difficulty locating SOGI information in the medical record: this information was largely never recorded, and when included, was inconsistently/not uniformly located in the medical record. On occasion, abstractors reported situational recording of SOGI information when relevant to the patient's cancer diagnosis. Abstractors further noticed that, where reported, the source of SOGI information (i.e., patient, physician) is largely unknown. CONCLUSION: Efforts are needed to ensure standardized implementation of the collection of SOGI variables within the clinical setting, such that this information can be collected by the central cancer registry system to support population-based equity research addressing LGBTQ + disparities.

Implementing nasal povidone-iodine decolonization to reduce infections in hemodialysis units: a qualitative assessment.

BACKGROUND: A substantial proportion of patients undergoing hemodialysis carry Staphylococcus aureus in their noses, and carriers are at increased risk of S. aureus bloodstream infections. Our pragmatic clinical trial implemented nasal povidone-iodine (PVI) decolonization for the prevention of bloodstream infections in the novel setting of hemodialysis units. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to identify pragmatic strategies for implementing PVI decolonization among patients in outpatient hemodialysis units. DESIGN: Qualitative descriptive study. SETTING: Outpatient hemodialysis units affiliated with five US academic medical centers. Units varied in size, patient demographics, and geographic location. INTERVIEWEES: Sixty-six interviewees including nurses, hemodialysis technicians, research coordinators, and other personnel. METHODS: We conducted interviews with personnel affiliated with all five academic medical centers and conducted thematic analysis of transcripts. RESULTS: Hemodialysis units had varied success with patient recruitment, but interviewees reported that patients and healthcare personnel (HCP) found PVI decolonization acceptable and feasible. Leadership support, HCP engagement, and tailored patient-focused tools or strategies facilitated patient engagement and PVI implementation. Interviewees reported both patients and HCP sometimes underestimated patients' infection risks and experienced infection-prevention fatigue. Other HCP barriers included limited staffing and poor staff engagement. Patient barriers included high health burdens, language barriers, memory issues, and lack of social support. CONCLUSION: Our qualitative study suggests that PVI decolonization would be acceptable to patients and clinical personnel, and implementation is feasible for outpatient hemodialysis units. Hemodialysis units could facilitate implementation by engaging unit leaders, patients and personnel, and developing education for patients about their infection risk.