Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Oct;13(10):1466-72.
doi: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2016.07.017. Epub 2016 Aug 27.

Exposure to and Attitudes Regarding Transgender Education Among Urology Residents

Geolani W Dy  1 , Nathan C Osbun  2 , Shane D Morrison  3 , David W Grant  4 , Paul A Merguerian  5 ; Transgender Education Study Group
Affiliations

Exposure to and Attitudes Regarding Transgender Education Among Urology Residents

Geolani W Dy et al. J Sex Med. 2016 Oct.

Abstract

Introduction: Transgender individuals are underserved within the health care system but might increasingly seek urologic care as insurers expand coverage for medical and surgical gender transition.

Aim: To evaluate urology residents' exposure to transgender patient care and their perceived importance of transgender surgical education.

Methods: Urology residents from a representative sample of U.S. training programs were asked to complete a cross-sectional survey from January through March 2016.

Main outcome measures: Respondents were queried regarding demographics, transgender curricular exposure (didactic vs clinical), and perceived importance of training opportunities in transgender patient care.

Results: In total, 289 urology residents completed the survey (72% response rate). Fifty-four percent of residents reported exposure to transgender patient care, with more residents from Western (74%) and North Central (72%) sections reporting exposure (P ≤ .01). Exposure occurred more frequently through direct patient interaction rather than through didactic education (psychiatric, 23% vs 7%, P < .001; medical, 17% vs 6%, P < .001; surgical, 33% vs 11%, P < .001). Female residents placed greater importance on gender-confirming surgical training than did their male colleagues (91% vs 70%, P < .001). Compared with Western section residents (88%), those from South Central (60%, P = .002), Southeastern (63%, P = .002), and Mid-Atlantic (63%, P = .003) sections less frequently viewed transgender-related surgical training as important. Most residents (77%) stated transgender-related surgical training should be offered in fellowships.

Conclusion: Urology resident exposure to transgender patient care is regionally dependent. Perceived importance of gender-confirming surgical training varies by sex and geography. A gap exists between the direct transgender patient care urology residencies provide and the didactic transgender education they receive.

Keywords: Curriculum; Medical Education; Residency; Transgender Persons.

PubMed Disclaimer