American Journal of Men’s Health

sexual behavior (Chege, 2005; Ott, 2010; Smith, Fenwick,

Skinner, Merriman, & Hallett, 2011).

The high percentage of males in this study who

reported a preference toward male sexual partners is sur-

prising in light of a national rate of 4% (Purcell et al.,

2012), but is consistent with previous observations in the

study’s clinical settings (Buzi, Smith, & Haas, in press).

These findings may suggest that the clinics in this study

were effective in reaching out to males, specifically

minority young MSM, by providing free to low-cost ser-

vices and promoting safe and supportive family planning

and reproductive health facilities for young men. MSM

appear to be especially vulnerable to adverse health out-

comes—fewer reported having used any method of birth

control at last sexual intercourse or intent to use birth

control in the future—as compared with men with a

female sexual partner preference. The clinic setting,

which was perceived as serving the general population,

may also be attractive to men who have not yet publically

identified as gay.

There is a dearth of information and studies around the

overall health of affluent minority men and low-income

nonminority men, making it difficult to accurately com-

pare this sample of participants with other populations

(Master et al., 2013; Molina, Alegria, & Chen, 2012).

One health assessment, The National College Health

Assessment (NCHA), focused on college students and

stratified data by gender (American College Health

Association, 2015). Although NCHA is a college sample

of males, the age ranges of the two samples are similar.

NCHA participants had overall higher education levels

and the majority were White non-Hispanics. A compari-

son between the male participants in the NCHA and the

present study suggests that fewer NCHA participants

engaged in sexual intercourse (68.1% vs. 83.7%, respec-

tively) and more reported using a form of birth control at

last sexual encounter, as compared with the males in the

current study (51.1% vs. 37.7%, respectively).

Additionally, the proportion of young men in the

NCHA survey who reported physical altercations (8.2%)

and physical harm by their partner (1.8%) is lower than

that observed in the present study (71.2% and 18.1%,

respectively). However, more participants in the NCHA

survey reported feeling very sad any time within the past

12 months as compared with males in the present study

(54.2% vs. 46.5%, respectively). The difference between

physical and mental health reporting is consistent with

prior studies, suggesting that young minority men may

manifest depression differently than the general popula-

tion. Rather than reporting symptoms such as feeling low

energy and blue, young minority men may show signs of

depression by engaging in physical altercations (Buzi,

Weinman, & Smith, 2010; CDC, 2004; “Link Between

Relationship,” 2013). This comparison suggests young

males in the present study are affected by multiple chal-

lenges that can compromise their health.

This study’s findings also demonstrated a lack of TSE

education in young males. While the U.S. Preventive

Services Task Force has recommended against TSE,

young minority men may represent a population in which

TSE and genitourinary health education may be benefi-

cial. Considering that males often do not seek health care

early in the course of disease, and with only 22% of the

male clinic population insured, it is reasonable to educate

and screen for testicular malignancy in this population of

young men (Farrow, 2009; Kalmuss & Tatum, 2007;

Moul, 2007).

Expanding comprehensive health services could con-

tribute to lowering STI and HIV rates in low-income

areas by providing male youth-friendly family planning

and reproductive health services such as SRH education

and urologic screenings. Improving access to family

planning clinics is essential to increasing the overall

health in young minority males, as utilization of these

services decreases health outcome gaps (Guttmacher

Institute, 2015; Laski & Wong, 2010).

This study has several limitations. The survey assessed

SRH needs of young men in a single large metropolitan

area, which limited the generalizability of the findings to

a broader population. Additionally, although several of

the questions used had been extracted from validated

questionnaires, the study’s questionnaire as a whole has

not been validated. Despite these limitations, this study

improves the understanding of SRH in young men by

highlighting gaps in SRH knowledge and access to care,

and by providing insight into the comprehensive needs of

minority young males.

Conclusion

The results of the present study indicate that young

minority males engage in high-risk sexual behaviors,

lack SRH knowledge and risk perception, and are not

involved in their personal health. These findings are

consistent with other studies suggesting the presence of

risk behaviors among minority young males (Brindis,

2002). This study also highlights the needs of MSM to

engage in safe sex practices such as condom use and

accessing SRH services. In order to address the needs of

young males, providers should establish guidelines to

ensure consistent and thorough health monitoring in this

population of men (Marcell & Ellen, 2012). Marcell and

Ellen (2012) recommend increasing health awareness,

involving more youth-focused services, providing SRH

education, institutionalizing programs, and providing

guidance and referrals. From the results of this study, it

appears that young minority males are also affected by

violence that may further compromise other aspects of

at UCSF LIBRARY & CKM on February 12, 2016

jmh.sagepub.com

Downloaded from