Facilitators and barriers to using telemedicine for gender-affirming care in gender-diverse youth: A qualitative study.

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare Pub Date : 2025-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-23 DOI:10.1177/1357633X241231015
David J Inwards-Breland, Debra Yeh, Maja Marinkovic, T R Richardson, Bixby Marino-Kibbee, Ava Bayley, Kyung E Rhee
{"title":"Facilitators and barriers to using telemedicine for gender-affirming care in gender-diverse youth: A qualitative study.","authors":"David J Inwards-Breland, Debra Yeh, Maja Marinkovic, T R Richardson, Bixby Marino-Kibbee, Ava Bayley, Kyung E Rhee","doi":"10.1177/1357633X241231015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>IntroductionAccess to gender-affirming care (GAC) is limited for gender-diverse (GD) youth, with the potential for further limitations given the current political climate. GAC has been shown to improve the mental health of GD youth and telemedicine (TM) could increase access to GAC. With limited data on the acceptability and feasibility of TM for GAC among GD youth, we sought to further explore their perspectives on the use of TM in their care.MethodsWe used a semi-structured interview guide, with prompts developed to explore participants' knowledge of TM, identify factors that influenced use, and advantages or disadvantages of use.ResultsThirty GD participants aged 13-21 years old participated in TM. While TM was not the preferred option for medical visits, it was recognized as a practical option for providing GAC. Various actual and perceived disadvantages noted by youth included, technical issues interrupting the visit, not receiving care equivalent to that of an in-person visit, having to see themselves on the screen, family members interrupting visits, and meeting new staff while connecting to a TM visit. The advantages, however, were an increased autonomy and convenience of TM, especially when used for specific aspects of GAC.DiscussionThe use of TM in GAC could be optimized by limiting camera use, eliminating/reducing staff involvement, being sensitive to privacy issues, and alternating TM with in-person visits. Clinicians should be cognizant of patient preferences and concerns and be flexible with visit types.</p>","PeriodicalId":50024,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare","volume":" ","pages":"873-881"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12179396/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1357633X241231015","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

IntroductionAccess to gender-affirming care (GAC) is limited for gender-diverse (GD) youth, with the potential for further limitations given the current political climate. GAC has been shown to improve the mental health of GD youth and telemedicine (TM) could increase access to GAC. With limited data on the acceptability and feasibility of TM for GAC among GD youth, we sought to further explore their perspectives on the use of TM in their care.MethodsWe used a semi-structured interview guide, with prompts developed to explore participants' knowledge of TM, identify factors that influenced use, and advantages or disadvantages of use.ResultsThirty GD participants aged 13-21 years old participated in TM. While TM was not the preferred option for medical visits, it was recognized as a practical option for providing GAC. Various actual and perceived disadvantages noted by youth included, technical issues interrupting the visit, not receiving care equivalent to that of an in-person visit, having to see themselves on the screen, family members interrupting visits, and meeting new staff while connecting to a TM visit. The advantages, however, were an increased autonomy and convenience of TM, especially when used for specific aspects of GAC.DiscussionThe use of TM in GAC could be optimized by limiting camera use, eliminating/reducing staff involvement, being sensitive to privacy issues, and alternating TM with in-person visits. Clinicians should be cognizant of patient preferences and concerns and be flexible with visit types.

使用远程医疗为性别多元化青年提供性别确认护理的促进因素和障碍:定性研究。
导言:对于性别多元化(GD)青年来说,获得性别肯定护理(GAC)的机会有限,而且在当前的政治气候下,这种机会可能会进一步受到限制。事实证明,GAC 可以改善 GD 青少年的心理健康,而远程医疗(TM)可以增加 GAC 的使用机会。由于有关广东青少年对远程医疗的接受程度和可行性的数据有限,我们试图进一步探讨他们对在其护理中使用远程医疗的看法:我们使用了半结构式访谈指南,并制定了提示语,以探究参与者对 TM 的了解程度、确定影响使用的因素以及使用的优势或劣势:30 名 13-21 岁的广东参与者参加了 TM。虽然 TM 并非就医的首选方案,但它被认为是提供 GAC 的实用方案。青少年指出的各种实际和感知到的缺点包括:技术问题中断了就诊、无法获得与亲自就诊同等的护理、必须在屏幕上看到自己、家人中断了就诊、在连接 TM 就诊时遇到新的工作人员。然而,TM 的优点是提高了自主性和便利性,尤其是在 GAC 的特定方面使用时:讨论:可以通过限制摄像头的使用、取消/减少工作人员的参与、注意隐私问题以及将 TM 与面对面探访交替进行等方式优化 TM 在 GAC 中的使用。临床医生应了解患者的偏好和顾虑,灵活处理探视类型。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
14.10
自引率
10.60%
发文量
174
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare provides excellent peer reviewed coverage of developments in telemedicine and e-health and is now widely recognised as the leading journal in its field. Contributions from around the world provide a unique perspective on how different countries and health systems are using new technology in health care. Sections within the journal include technology updates, editorials, original articles, research tutorials, educational material, review articles and reports from various telemedicine organisations. A subscription to this journal will help you to stay up-to-date in this fast moving and growing area of medicine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信