Billy A Caceres1, April J Ancheta1, Caroline Dorsen2, Kelley Newlin-Lew3, Donald Edmondson4, Tonda L Hughes1. 1. Program for the Study of LGBT Health, Columbia University School of Nursing, New York, NY, USA. 2. New York University Rory Meyers College of Nursing, New York, NY, USA. 3. School of Nursing, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT, USA. 4. Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.
Abstract
Objectives: Sexual minorities face significant psychosocial stressors (such as discrimination and violence) that impact their health. Several studies indicate that sexual minority women (SMW) and bisexual men may be at highest risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD), but limited research has examined physiological CVD risk or racial/ethnic differences. This study sought to examine racial/ethnic differences in physiological risk factors for CVD among sexual minority and heterosexual adults.Design: We analyzed data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2001-2016) using sex-stratified multiple linear regression models to estimate differences in physiological CVD risk. We compared sexual minorities (gay/lesbian, bisexual, 'not sure') to heterosexual participants first without regard to race/ethnicity. Then we compared sexual minorities by race/ethnicity to White heterosexual participants. Results: The sample included 22,305 participants (ages 18-59). Lesbian women had higher body mass index (BMI) but lower total cholesterol than heterosexual women. Bisexual women had higher systolic blood pressure (SBP). Gay men had lower BMI and glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) relative to heterosexual men. White and Black lesbian women and bisexual women of all races/ethnicities had higher BMI than White heterosexual women; Black bisexual women had higher SBP and HbA1c. Black sexual minority men had higher HbA1c relative to White heterosexual men. Latino 'not sure' men also had higher SBP, HbA1c, and total cholesterol than White heterosexual men.Conclusions: Given evidence of higher CVD risk in sexual minority people of color relative to White heterosexuals, there is a need for health promotion initiatives to address these disparities. Additional research that incorporates longitudinal designs and examines the influence of psychosocial stressors on CVD risk in sexual minorities is recommended. Findings have implications for clinical and policy efforts to promote the cardiovascular health of sexual minorities.
Objectives: Sexual minorities face significant psychosocial stressors (such as discrimination and violence) that impact their health. Several studies indicate that sexual minority women (SMW) and bisexual men may be at highest risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD), but limited research has examined physiological CVD risk or racial/ethnic differences. This study sought to examine racial/ethnic differences in physiological risk factors for CVD among sexual minority and heterosexual adults.Design: We analyzed data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2001-2016) using sex-stratified multiple linear regression models to estimate differences in physiological CVD risk. We compared sexual minorities (gay/lesbian, bisexual, 'not sure') to heterosexual participants first without regard to race/ethnicity. Then we compared sexual minorities by race/ethnicity to White heterosexual participants. Results: The sample included 22,305 participants (ages 18-59). Lesbian women had higher body mass index (BMI) but lower total cholesterol than heterosexual women. Bisexual women had higher systolic blood pressure (SBP). Gay men had lower BMI and glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) relative to heterosexual men. White and Black lesbian women and bisexual women of all races/ethnicities had higher BMI than White heterosexual women; Black bisexual women had higher SBP and HbA1c. Black sexual minority men had higher HbA1c relative to White heterosexual men. Latino 'not sure' men also had higher SBP, HbA1c, and total cholesterol than White heterosexual men.Conclusions: Given evidence of higher CVD risk in sexual minority people of color relative to White heterosexuals, there is a need for health promotion initiatives to address these disparities. Additional research that incorporates longitudinal designs and examines the influence of psychosocial stressors on CVD risk in sexual minorities is recommended. Findings have implications for clinical and policy efforts to promote the cardiovascular health of sexual minorities.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cardiovascular disease; health promotion; intersectionality; race/ethnicity; sexual minorities
Authors: Sean Esteban McCabe; Tonda L Hughes; Alicia K Matthews; Joseph G L Lee; Brady T West; Carol J Boyd; Cynthia Arslanian-Engoren Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2019-03-30 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Salim Yusuf; Steven Hawken; Stephanie Ounpuu; Tony Dans; Alvaro Avezum; Fernando Lanas; Matthew McQueen; Andrzej Budaj; Prem Pais; John Varigos; Liu Lisheng Journal: Lancet Date: 2004 Sep 11-17 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Edward P Havranek; Mahasin S Mujahid; Donald A Barr; Irene V Blair; Meryl S Cohen; Salvador Cruz-Flores; George Davey-Smith; Cheryl R Dennison-Himmelfarb; Michael S Lauer; Debra W Lockwood; Milagros Rosal; Clyde W Yancy Journal: Circulation Date: 2015-08-03 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Valery L Feigin; Gregory A Roth; Mohsen Naghavi; Priya Parmar; Rita Krishnamurthi; Sumeet Chugh; George A Mensah; Bo Norrving; Ivy Shiue; Marie Ng; Kara Estep; Kelly Cercy; Christopher J L Murray; Mohammad H Forouzanfar Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2016-06-09 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Jessica Sherman; Christina Dyar; Jodi McDaniel; Nicholas T Funderburg; Karen M Rose; Matt Gorr; Ethan Morgan Journal: J Behav Med Date: 2022-01-16
Authors: Billy A Caceres; Carl G Streed; Heather L Corliss; Donald M Lloyd-Jones; Phoenix A Matthews; Monica Mukherjee; Tonia Poteat; Nicole Rosendale; Leanna M Ross Journal: Circulation Date: 2020-10-08 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Rodman E Turpin; Ellesse-Roselee L Akré; Natasha D Williams; Bradley O Boekeloo; Jessica N Fish Journal: Acad Med Date: 2021-11-01 Impact factor: 6.893