Gender equity education in oncology: A survey study of hematology-oncology fellowship program directors.

Abstract

192 Background: Understanding gender equity (GE) as it pertains to patient care as well as the healthcare workforce is essential to the education of future physicians. However, the landscape of GE education in hematology-oncology (HO) fellowship programs is not well-characterized. The purpose of this study was to examine if and how current HO fellows receive training about GE for both patients and physicians. Furthermore, we aimed to identify barriers to providing such training and establish opportunities for educational initiatives regarding GE in HO. Methods: We conducted an online survey of program directors (PDs) of adult HO fellowship programs in the United States. We asked for PD perceptions of how important GE is for patients and physicians and whether their training programs currently offer GE training. For programs without such training, PDs were asked about reasons for lack of current training and level of interest in providing it in the future. Responses were recorded using Likert scales, multiple choice, and open-ended responses. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, and open-ended questions were analyzed with thematic analysis. Results: Of 172 PDs contacted, 57 PDs completed the survey (33.1%). Most PDs felt that training in GE issues is “somewhat important” or “very important” regarding patient care (n = 39, 68.4%) and the physician workforce (n = 45, 80.4%). However, most PDs reported that their program does not provide formal training in GE issues regarding patient care (n = 48, 84.2%) or the physician workforce (n = 44, 78.6%). Common reasons listed for lack of GE training include lack of resources (regarding patients: n = 28, 68.3% and regarding physicians: n = 24, 54.5%). Most PDs were interested in resources for patient and physician GE (n = 46, 93.9% and n = 39, 88.6%, respectively). Several programs were open to sharing their training materials for patient (n = 3, 44.4%) and physician GE (n = 8, 66.7%). Conclusions: While most HO PDs feel that GE training is important for patient care and the physician workforce, most reported their fellowship does not offer such training primarily due to lack of resources. Given the interest of many PDs for more educational GE resources, there are opportunities to share existing materials and create new resources to enhance the GE training for future HO physicians.[Table: see text]