Examines nursing home preferences related to LGBTQIA+ issues among diverse sexual orientations, highlighting key differences.
Objectives In light of the very restricted knowledge, we aimed to examine future nursing home (NH) preferences regarding LGBTQIA+ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer/questioning, intersex, asexual, and other sexual and gender minority) issues among heterosexuals and sexual minorities in Germany. Design Representative sample of the German general adult population. Setting and Participants Individuals residing in Germany aged 18 to 74 years (n = 2518; average age was 47 years). Methods Regarding future NH preferences, outcomes focused on the importance of tolerance toward LGBTQIA+ individuals, offering LGBTQIA+ friendly services and treatments, and openness to the concerns of LGBTQIA+ individuals. The main independent variable was sexual orientation (heterosexual; sexual minorities encompassing homosexual, bisexual, or other). Several sociodemographic and health-related covariates were incorporated in the regression model. Results Overall, 8.7% of the respondents belonged to the group of sexual minorities. Regarding future NH preferences, unadjusted and adjusted regressions showed that sexual minorities had a higher importance of tolerance toward LGBTQIA+ individuals (β = 1.44; P < .001), offering LGBTQIA+ friendly services and treatments (β = 1.15; P < .001), and openness to the concerns of LGBTQIA+ individuals (β = 1.29; P < .001). Our results were mainly driven by differences between heterosexuals and homosexuals. Conclusions and Implications The identified differences in the preferences regarding LGBTQIA+ issues between heterosexual and sexual minority people showed the particular significance of these factors for the group of sexual minorities (and homosexuals in particular). Taking such factors into account might probably contribute to the satisfaction of sexual minorities in NHs. Moreover, our results are important for NH operators and health policymakers.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hajek et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: