Purpose of Review Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and other gender diverse (LGBTQ+) individuals face barriers in access to healthcare and face poorer healthcare outcomes than the cisgender population. Gynecologists provide routine health maintenance and primary care for LGBTQ + patients. Lack of physician knowledge of the unique healthcare considerations of LGBTQ+ patients heightens barriers to care. Healthcare simulation can serve to provide Ob/Gyn residents with practice implementing and strengthening their communication skills and cultural competence with LGBTQ+ patients. There are various simulation modalities, including standardized patients, virtual reality, and high-fidelity manikins, which can be implemented for LGBTQ+ simulation. This article will review implementation of simulation-based training, creating a safe learning environment, and strategies for debriefing and feedback. Recent Findings Various governing bodies of medical education list education on LGBTQ+ care within key learning objectives for medical students and obstetric and gynecologic (Ob/Gyn) residents. However, program directors and residents have identified LGBTQ+ healthcare as a gap in their education, often citing lack of curriculum as an educational barrier. Among Ob/Gyn residents who have participated in healthcare simulation on LGBTQ+ care, there has been a qualitative improvement in comfort with and knowledge of medical care (Ruud et al. in J Midwifery Womens Health 2021;66(6):778–86), (Kreines et al. in J Assist Reprod Genet 2022;39(12):2755–66). Summary Healthcare simulation should be implemented within medical training to improve the care and medical outcomes of LGBTQ+ patients. While some qualitative studies have shown resident self-reported improvement after healthcare simulation with LGBTQ+ patients, longitudinal studies need to be done to assess long-term impact. Additionally, educational grants for simulation equipment and curricula can improve access to healthcare simulation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Neumann et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: