Please login first
SEXUAL AND REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH KNOWLEDGE (S&RHK): MOVING THE NEEDLE - THE POWERFUL PURPOSE OF MENTORS
* 1 , * 2 , * 3
1  Department of Internal Medicine, Wayne State University School of Medicine
2  Wayne State University School of Medicine
3  Office of Diversity and Inclusion, Wayne State University School of Medicine
Academic Editor: Michele Roccella

https://doi.org/10.3390/ECCM-10875 (registering DOI)
Abstract:

PURPOSE

COVID-19 heightened awareness of primary caregivers (parents, aunts, uncles, grandparents, etc.) as fundamentally important in mentoring adolescents and youth toward avoidance of current cultural pitfalls. Proximity, but also passionate and consistent involvement, interest, and emotional investment, affords them a unique opportunity. S&RHK is an efficient, effective, and measurable health outcome worthy of consideration as “low-hanging fruit”, with the potential to reap significant long-term benefits in the spectrum of Social Determinants of Health (SDOH).

METHODS

A 50-item survey was administered to men and women, aged 20-89 years, in two US outpatient, primary care clinics, 1 urban, 1 suburban. 18 questions gauged S&RHK, with 1 correct answer per question. Data coding and analysis used IBM-SPSS. Statistical analysis included: Pearson correlation, t, and Chi-squared tests; with significance at p <0.05.

RESULTS

Of 352 patients surveyed; 81.5% were women and 18.5% men. Mean age was 55.2 ± 14.6 years. 84.1% were African-American. 62.3% had incomes ≤ $50,000. Average years of formal education were 14.1± 2.5, and lower in older adults. 42.3% of those with formal sex education stated that it was sufficient; 16.8% insufficient. 35.2 % reported no such education. Mean S&RHK score was 10.2 ± 3.6, (max. = 18). 97% stated having sufficient S&RHK was important. S&RHK scores correlated positively with years of education, income, and use of digital communication ≥11x/week (p<0.001); negatively with age (p<0.001). Effect of face-to-face communication on S&RHK did not reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

The positive association of S&RHK with technological (but not face-to-face) communication could possibly be traced back to education and income: two SDOH. Those living alone (also having lower incomes) and older adults (irrespective of income) scored lower. Intriguing is the effect of traditional two-parent or multigenerational households, in bridging the S&RHK gap for older adults and preparing them as mentors to the next generation.

Keywords: Sexual Health; Reproductive Health; Social Determinants of Health; Mentors; Household type
Top