Racial and ethnic representation in primary research contributing to pelvic organ prolapse treatment guidelines

Minority Women Undergo Surgical Treatment of Pelvic Organ Prolapse at Similar Rates to Non-minorities in a Hispanic Minority-majority Population: An Analysis of Nearly 1000 Women

OBJECTIVE

To assess how race, ethnicity, primary language, clinical and other sociodemographic factors predict surgical treatment for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) in a minority-majority Hispanic population.

METHODS

We identified patients with POP ICD-10 codes from Oct 2019 to Dec 2022 at our Urogynecology academic practice. Data were collected by chart review. Covariates were obtained by manual abstraction. Continuous and categorical variables were analyzed using t-test and chi-square test, and Wilcoxon rank-sum test for non-parametric data. A logistic regression model was fitted to identify independent predictors of surgery.

RESULTS

Of 943 patients over 38 months, 441 (46.8%) underwent surgery. On univariate analysis, younger age, Hispanic/Latino ethnicity, Spanish as primary language, private insurance, stage of prolapse and obesity correlated with higher rates of surgical treatment. On multivariate regression, only age and prolapse compartment remained significant predictors. Younger age and apical prolapse increased the likelihood of surgery (OR=.98 [.96-.99], P = <.001; R=2.31 [1.13-4.72], P = <.001, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Controlling for confounders, age, and apical prolapse compartment predicted surgical treatment for POP in our Hispanic minority-majority population. Previously identified barriers to care including minority status and non-English primary language do not appear to exist in our population. This may be related to linguistic, ethnic, and racial concordance between healthcare staff and patients, alongside protective aspects of ethnic enclaves. Further research is warranted to understand the impact of cultural barriers, such as provider language, on patient-provider dynamics and surgical decision-making.

Creating an Inclusive Urology Practice

Purpose of Review

Patients seeking urologic care come from diverse backgrounds. Therefore, clinics should strive for inclusivity to make all patients feel comfortable seeing a urologist. This review aims to outline and analyze literature relevant to the care of LGTBQIA+ (lesbian, gay, transgender/transexual, queer/questioning, intersex, asexual/allies, nonbinary/genderqueer +), racial and ethnic minorities, those who have disabilities, and those with a high body mass index (BMI). Although this review article presents the care of diverse communities separately, there is an overlap of the various social axes influencing healthcare outcomes. Healthcare workers should be open-minded to learning about evolving community needs.

Recent Findings

Creating a safe space for LGTBQIA+ requires understanding terminology, awareness of community-specific challenges and health risks, and changing heteronormative behaviors built into medicine. Specific clinical care delivery structural processes and patient-physician-centered practices can make a clinic welcoming for patients from underrepresented backgrounds and with disabilities. BMI surgical requirements may pose barriers to care, and if implemented, there should be assistance to reach specified weight goals.

Summary

Creating an inclusive urology clinical practice takes time, but it can be achieved by building a collaborative team. Treating patients with consideration of their personal identities and social determinants of health will lead to better patient-center care and health outcomes.

Underrepresentation in Pelvic Floor Disorder Patient-Reported Outcomes: Whose Outcomes Are We Measuring?

IMPORTANCE

Patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments measure the patient's perspective. It is unclear whether commonly used PRO measures were tested in populations that had racial and ethnic distributions comparable with those reported in U.S. census data.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the proportion of non-White race and Hispanic ethnicity participants with their expected proportion based on U.S. census data for PRO instruments with U.S.-based validation studies.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a retrospective review of PRO measures considered by the Pelvic Floors Disorders Consortium Working Group on Patient-Reported Outcomes in their 2020 consensus publication. Study and participant information were abstracted from PRO validation studies. Racial and ethnic representation in U.S.-based studies were compared with U.S. census data. The primary outcome was the representation quotient of reported races and ethnicities, calculated as the reported percentage of the study population identifying with a race and/or ethnicity divided by the proportion of the U.S. population identifying with that race and/or ethnicity when the study was published.

RESULTS

Forty-five studies with 21,080 total participants were included. Race was reported in 17 of 45 studies (37.8%), and ethnicity was reported in 7 of 45 (15.6%). Most studies did not specify how race and ethnicity information was collected. For U.S.-based studies, the representation quotient of White participants from 1995 to 2019 was 1.15. Indigenous American/Native American/American Indian/Alaska Natives had the lowest representation quotient (0.22). Reporting of ethnicity increased over time (P = 0.001), although there was no significant change in the reporting of race or the representation of various races and ethnicities (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Non-White and Hispanic patients may be underrepresented in U.S.-based validation studies for PRO instruments in pelvic floor disorders.

Health disparities and access to advanced therapy for overactive bladder

AIMS

Refractory overactive bladder (OAB) is among the most common reasons for referral to specialists in voiding dysfunction. Significant racial and ethnic disparities exist in prevalence, severity, and management of OAB, presenting care barriers for marginalized patients. We aim to explicate these disparities and explore the factors that led to their existence and persistence. We will additionally offer suggestions to mitigate such disparities and approach equitable care for our patients.

METHODS

This is a narrative review of pertinent articles related to health disparities in OAB. Articles on OAB prevalence stratified by race and ethnicity, and variations in treatment patterns for patients of marginalized backgrounds were identified from the PubMed database. We also included a review of evidence from governmental and historical sources to provide sociocultural context.

RESULTS

Patients from marginalized backgrounds are underrepresented in OAB literature. There appear to be differences in symptom severity and prevalence based on race. OAB severity seems closely entwined with social determinants of health. Patients from marginalized populations experience numerous care barriers impeding the treatment of OAB. Finally, White patients are more likely to receive advanced management for OAB.

CONCLUSIONS

Numerous health disparities exist in the diagnosis and management of OAB. This review is grounded in societal context: health injustice in the United States ultimately stems from systemic racism. Improving our understanding of care disparities and the systems that allow them to persist will bring us closer to equity and allow our patients from marginalized backgrounds to obtain the evidence-based care they deserve.