Integral approach to LGBTQIA+ health and its challenges in a municipality in southwest Minas Gerais

Abstract

Introduction: The Federal Constitution and the principles of SUS (Unified Health System) establish health as a right for all, yet LGBTQIA+ individuals still face barriers to access. Discriminatory and heteronormative treatment often exacerbates their vulnerability. The health care needs of this population are frequently limited to sexually transmitted infections, highlighting a lack of professional preparation and the need for comprehensive care. Objective: To describe the stages and analyze the results of the research project “Characterization of Health Care for the LGBTQIA+ Population in a Municipality in Southwest Minas Gerais,” conducted at the State University of Minas Gerais - Passos, MG. Methods: This was a quantitative, crosssectional, exploratory, descriptive, and analytical study, conducted in 22 primary health care units in Passos/MG, between September and November 2022. The research included 136 professionals from Family Health Strategy (FHS). Data collection followed a defined schedule after approval by the UEMG Research Ethics Committee and was carried out through two self-administered questionnaires: one sociodemographic and another on the professionals’ perception and knowledge regarding LGBTQIA+ health. The instrument was refined by eight specialists, who suggested adjustments to the questions for greater appropriateness. The responses were tabulated and analyzed using SPSS software. Results: Among the professionals interviewed, 80.1% reported not remembering or not having received training on LGBTQIA+ health, and 28.7% rated their knowledge of the National LGBT Health Policy (PNSI-LGBT) as “good,” while 70.5% classified it as “average” or “poor.” Nevertheless, 56.6% believed that their teams are prepared to care for this population. However, the discrepancy between the low level of training and the perceived preparedness for care revealed a significant gap in professional education. Most participants (75.7%) agreed that including content on sexual and gender diversity in educational curricula is essential, contrasting with 8.1% who saw no relevance. The majority of professionals recognized sexuality as a determinant of health (77.2%). Conclusions: The results, although limited by the sample size and region, align with the literature: there is a lag and a lack of professional preparation. It is recommended that regular training be implemented and strategies developed to reinforce inclusive public policies. The adoption of these practices may contribute to improving comprehensive care and reducing inequities in access to health care.