Mai-Han Trinh, Meg Quint, Devin Coon, Shalender Bhasin, Benjamin Tocci, Sari L Reisner
{"title":"Transgender Patients Report Lower Satisfaction with Care Received than Cisgender Patients Receiving Care in an Academic Medical Care System.","authors":"Mai-Han Trinh, Meg Quint, Devin Coon, Shalender Bhasin, Benjamin Tocci, Sari L Reisner","doi":"10.1089/lgbt.2023.0034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Purpose:</i></b> Transgender and gender diverse (TGD) patients experience challenges in health care settings, including stigma, lack of culturally competent providers, and suboptimal gender-affirming care. However, differences in patient satisfaction between TGD patients compared with cisgender patients have been inadequately studied. This study aimed to assess such differences in patient satisfaction with care received in a large academic medical care system in Boston, Massachusetts. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Routine patient satisfaction surveys were fielded from January to December 2021 and were summarized. Logistic regression models compared low net promoter scores (NPS; ≤6) between gender identity groups (cisgender women, transmasculine and nonbinary/genderqueer people assigned female at birth [AFAB], transfeminine and nonbinary/genderqueer people assigned male at birth) relative to cisgender men, adjusting for age, race, ethnicity, education, inpatient/outpatient service delivery, and distance from medical center. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Of 94,810 patients, 246 (0.3%) were TGD and 94,549 (99.7%) were cisgender. The mean age was 58.3 years (standard deviation = 16.6). Of the total sample, 17.0% of patients were people of color, 6.6% were Hispanic/Latinx, 48.6% were college graduates, and 2.6% had received inpatient care. In general, patient satisfaction with health care received was lower for TGD patients than for cisgender patients (7.3% vs. 4.5% reporting low NPS; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.70-1.85). Transmasculine and nonbinary/genderqueer patients AFAB had elevated odds of low NPS compared with cisgender men (8.8% vs. 3.6%; aOR = 1.71; 95% CI = 1.02-2.89). <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Future research is warranted to better understand factors driving lower ratings among TGD patients. Health care quality improvement efforts are needed to address gender identity inequities in care.</p>","PeriodicalId":18062,"journal":{"name":"LGBT health","volume":" ","pages":"202-209"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LGBT health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/lgbt.2023.0034","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/12/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: Transgender and gender diverse (TGD) patients experience challenges in health care settings, including stigma, lack of culturally competent providers, and suboptimal gender-affirming care. However, differences in patient satisfaction between TGD patients compared with cisgender patients have been inadequately studied. This study aimed to assess such differences in patient satisfaction with care received in a large academic medical care system in Boston, Massachusetts. Methods: Routine patient satisfaction surveys were fielded from January to December 2021 and were summarized. Logistic regression models compared low net promoter scores (NPS; ≤6) between gender identity groups (cisgender women, transmasculine and nonbinary/genderqueer people assigned female at birth [AFAB], transfeminine and nonbinary/genderqueer people assigned male at birth) relative to cisgender men, adjusting for age, race, ethnicity, education, inpatient/outpatient service delivery, and distance from medical center. Results: Of 94,810 patients, 246 (0.3%) were TGD and 94,549 (99.7%) were cisgender. The mean age was 58.3 years (standard deviation = 16.6). Of the total sample, 17.0% of patients were people of color, 6.6% were Hispanic/Latinx, 48.6% were college graduates, and 2.6% had received inpatient care. In general, patient satisfaction with health care received was lower for TGD patients than for cisgender patients (7.3% vs. 4.5% reporting low NPS; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.70-1.85). Transmasculine and nonbinary/genderqueer patients AFAB had elevated odds of low NPS compared with cisgender men (8.8% vs. 3.6%; aOR = 1.71; 95% CI = 1.02-2.89). Conclusion: Future research is warranted to better understand factors driving lower ratings among TGD patients. Health care quality improvement efforts are needed to address gender identity inequities in care.
LGBT healthPUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH -
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
6.20%
发文量
80
期刊介绍:
LGBT Health is the premier peer-reviewed journal dedicated to promoting optimal healthcare for millions of sexual and gender minority persons worldwide by focusing specifically on health while maintaining sufficient breadth to encompass the full range of relevant biopsychosocial and health policy issues. This Journal aims to promote greater awareness of the health concerns particular to each sexual minority population, and to improve availability and delivery of culturally appropriate healthcare services. LGBT Health also encourages further research and increased funding in this critical but currently underserved domain. The Journal provides a much-needed authoritative source and international forum in all areas pertinent to LGBT health and healthcare services. Contributions from all continents are solicited including Asia and Africa which are currently underrepresented in sex research.