Assisted Reproduction for a Same-Sex Couple: Interdisciplinary Preclinical Active Learning Module Combining Case-Based Small Group Discussion and Patient Panel

Xochitl A Green; Kayla J Flores Tindall; Ana L Flores Tindall; Hana Anderson; Melody Y Hou

doi:10.1177/23821205241257325

Assisted Reproduction for a Same-Sex Couple: Interdisciplinary Preclinical Active Learning Module Combining Case-Based Small Group Discussion and Patient Panel

J Med Educ Curric Dev. 2024 May 23:11:23821205241257325. doi: 10.1177/23821205241257325. eCollection 2024 Jan-Dec.

Authors

Xochitl A Green¹, Kayla J Flores Tindall^{2

3}, Ana L Flores Tindall³, Hana Anderson⁴, Melody Y Hou⁵

Affiliations

¹ University of California, Davis School of Medicine, Sacramento, CA, USA.
² Department of Adult and Family Medicine, Kaiser Permanente Santa Rosa, Santa Rosa, CA, USA.
³ North Bay LGBTQI Families, Santa Rosa, CA, USA.
⁴ Department of Internal Medicine, Department of Cell Biology and Human Anatomy, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, CA, USA.
⁵ Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, CA, USA.

Abstract

Objective: Physicians often feel they are not equipped to serve the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and queer (LGBTQ) community, but integrating education that incorporates LGBTQ content and perspective into an already-condensed medical school curriculum is challenging. We developed a preclinical active learning module on assisted reproductive technologies (ART) in LGBTQ care, integrating clinical and basic science content with patient perspective.

Methods: We created a module that combined a case-based small group discussion with a patient panel. We developed a case for discussion in collaboration with a female cis-gender same-sex couple who conceived through ART. A patient panel with the same couple followed the discussion. All first-year medical students attended both parts of the module. Prior to participation, students learned reproductive endocrinology and genetics concepts through lectures. After the module, students voluntarily completed an anonymous survey to evaluate self-perceived changes in familiarity and confidence with LGBTQ patients and satisfaction with the module.

Results: Of the 126 students who attended, 72 (57%) completed the survey. Of these, 69 (95.8%) felt the module gave them better perspectives on LGBTQ patient experiences, and 66 to 69 (92-96%) agreed the small group discussion achieved its learning objectives on LGBTQ health barriers and the application of ART. Students valued the patient panel (84.7%) and cited a better understanding of reproductive barriers for LGBTQ patients as its most valuable point.

Conclusion: A preclerkship module combining a case-based small group discussion and patient panel on ART delivered in the context of a real-life LGBTQ patient experience provided an opportunity for the students to integrate basic science and clinical science knowledge to reflect on the healthcare needs of this patient population. Creating the case in collaboration with the same-sex couple and having them present their own experience provided an authentic perspective to students on reproductive healthcare issues and how they impact members of the LGBTQ community.

Keywords: Same-sex; assisted reproductive technologies; bisexual; case-based small group discussion; gay; lesbian; patient panel; preclinical; queer (LGBTQ); transgender.