Improving the integration of care for trans adults: ICTA a mixed-methods study.

Richard Holti, Evelyn Callahan, Jamie Fletcher, Sam Hope, Naomi Moller, Ben Vincent, Paul Walley
{"title":"Improving the integration of care for trans adults: ICTA a mixed-methods study.","authors":"Richard Holti, Evelyn Callahan, Jamie Fletcher, Sam Hope, Naomi Moller, Ben Vincent, Paul Walley","doi":"10.3310/EWTA4502","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This research concerns improving the National Health Service health services trans adults need. These include the national specialist Gender Identity Clinics that support people making a medical transition. Not all trans people need to make a medical transition, and transition can take many different paths. Waits to be seen by Gender Identity Clinics are, however, several years long, and there may be significant problems of co-ordination between different aspects of transition-related care, and between transition-related care and general health care.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The main objectives were to understand: Which factors make services more or less accessible and acceptable to the variety of trans adults? How initiatives for providing more person-centred and integrated care can be successfully implemented and further improved?</p><p><strong>Design, data sources and participants: </strong>An online and paper screening survey was used to gather data on demographics and service use of trans people across the United Kingdom, with 2056 responses. Researchers used survey data to construct five purposive subsamples for individual qualitative interviews, identifying groups of people more likely to experience social exclusion or stigma. There were 65 online interviews. In addition, 23 trans Black people and people of colour attended focus groups. Six case studies were completed: four on initiatives to improve care and two on experiences of particular trans populations. Fifty-five service provider staff and 45 service users were interviewed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The following undermine person-centred co-ordinated care and can lead to experiences of harm: lack of respectful treatment of trans people by general practitioner practices; inadequate funding of services; lack of support during waiting; the extended and challenging nature of Gender Identity Clinic diagnostic assessments, sometimes experienced as adversarial; breakdowns in collaboration between Gender Identity Clinics and general practitioner practices over hormone therapy; lack of National Health Service psychological support for trans people. Case studies indicated ways to improve care, although each has significant unresolved issues: training in trans health care for general practitioners; third-sector peer-support workers for trans people who come to National Health Services; gender services taking a collaborative approach to assessing what people need, clarifying treatment options, benefits and risks; regional general practitioner-led hormone therapy clinics, bringing trans health care into the mainstream; psychology services that support trans people rather than assess them.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Some contexts of care and experiences of particular groups of trans people were not addressed sufficiently within the scope of the project. While efforts were made to recruit people subject to multiple forms of stigma, there remained gaps in representation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and future work: </strong>The findings have significant implications for commissioners and providers of existing National Health Services gender services, including recently established pilot services in primary care. In particular they point to the need for assessments for access to transition care to be more collaborative and culturally aware, implying the value of exploring informed consent models for accessing transition-related care. Further research is needed to investigate how far the findings apply with particular subpopulations.</p><p><strong>Study registration: </strong>This study is registered as Research Registry, no. 5235.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: 17/51/08) and is published in full in <i>Health and Social Care Delivery Research</i>; Vol. 12, No. 28. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.</p>","PeriodicalId":519880,"journal":{"name":"Health and social care delivery research","volume":"12 28","pages":"1-217"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health and social care delivery research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3310/EWTA4502","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This research concerns improving the National Health Service health services trans adults need. These include the national specialist Gender Identity Clinics that support people making a medical transition. Not all trans people need to make a medical transition, and transition can take many different paths. Waits to be seen by Gender Identity Clinics are, however, several years long, and there may be significant problems of co-ordination between different aspects of transition-related care, and between transition-related care and general health care.

Objectives: The main objectives were to understand: Which factors make services more or less accessible and acceptable to the variety of trans adults? How initiatives for providing more person-centred and integrated care can be successfully implemented and further improved?

Design, data sources and participants: An online and paper screening survey was used to gather data on demographics and service use of trans people across the United Kingdom, with 2056 responses. Researchers used survey data to construct five purposive subsamples for individual qualitative interviews, identifying groups of people more likely to experience social exclusion or stigma. There were 65 online interviews. In addition, 23 trans Black people and people of colour attended focus groups. Six case studies were completed: four on initiatives to improve care and two on experiences of particular trans populations. Fifty-five service provider staff and 45 service users were interviewed.

Results: The following undermine person-centred co-ordinated care and can lead to experiences of harm: lack of respectful treatment of trans people by general practitioner practices; inadequate funding of services; lack of support during waiting; the extended and challenging nature of Gender Identity Clinic diagnostic assessments, sometimes experienced as adversarial; breakdowns in collaboration between Gender Identity Clinics and general practitioner practices over hormone therapy; lack of National Health Service psychological support for trans people. Case studies indicated ways to improve care, although each has significant unresolved issues: training in trans health care for general practitioners; third-sector peer-support workers for trans people who come to National Health Services; gender services taking a collaborative approach to assessing what people need, clarifying treatment options, benefits and risks; regional general practitioner-led hormone therapy clinics, bringing trans health care into the mainstream; psychology services that support trans people rather than assess them.

Limitations: Some contexts of care and experiences of particular groups of trans people were not addressed sufficiently within the scope of the project. While efforts were made to recruit people subject to multiple forms of stigma, there remained gaps in representation.

Conclusions and future work: The findings have significant implications for commissioners and providers of existing National Health Services gender services, including recently established pilot services in primary care. In particular they point to the need for assessments for access to transition care to be more collaborative and culturally aware, implying the value of exploring informed consent models for accessing transition-related care. Further research is needed to investigate how far the findings apply with particular subpopulations.

Study registration: This study is registered as Research Registry, no. 5235.

Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: 17/51/08) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 12, No. 28. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

改善对变性成人的一体化护理:ICTA 混合方法研究。
背景:本研究涉及改善国民健康服务中变性成人所需的医疗服务。这些服务包括全国性的性别认同专科门诊,为进行医学转变的人提供支持。并非所有变性人都需要进行医学过渡,过渡可以有许多不同的途径。然而,等待到性别认同诊所就诊的时间长达数年,而且在与变性相关的护理的不同方面之间,以及在与变性相关的护理和普通医疗护理之间,可能存在严重的协调问题:主要目标是了解哪些因素使各种变性成人更容易或更不容易获得和接受服务?如何成功实施并进一步改进提供更加以人为本的综合护理的举措?研究人员通过在线和纸质筛选调查收集了英国各地变性人的人口统计数据和服务使用情况,共收到 2056 份回复。研究人员利用调查数据为个人定性访谈构建了五个目的性子样本,确定了更有可能遭受社会排斥或污名化的人群。共进行了 65 次在线访谈。此外,23 名跨性别黑人和有色人种参加了焦点小组。完成了六项案例研究:四项关于改善护理的举措,两项关于特定变性人群的经历。对 55 名服务提供者工作人员和 45 名服务使用者进行了访谈:以下情况破坏了以人为本的协调护理,并可能导致伤害体验:全科医生缺乏对变性人的尊重;服务资金不足;等待期间缺乏支持;性别认同诊所的诊断评估时间过长且具有挑战性,有时被认为是对抗性的;性别认同诊所和全科医生在激素治疗方面的合作破裂;国家医疗卫生服务机构缺乏对变性人的心理支持。案例研究指出了改善护理的方法,尽管每种方法都存在重大的未决问题:对全科医生进行变性保健培训;为前来国民健康服务机构就诊的变性人提供第三部门同伴支持工作者;性别服务机构采取合作方式评估人们的需求,明确治疗方案、益处和风险;地区性全科医生主导的激素治疗诊所,将变性保健纳入主流;为变性人提供支持而非评估的心理服务:局限性:在项目范围内,某些护理环境和特定变性人群体的经历未得到充分考虑。虽然已努力招募受到多种形式羞辱的人,但在代表性方面仍存在差距:研究结果对现有国民健康服务机构性别服务的委托人和提供者(包括最近在初级保健中建立的试点服务)具有重要影响。研究结果特别指出,对过渡护理的评估需要更具协作性和文化意识,这意味着探索知情同意模式以获得过渡相关护理的价值所在。还需要进一步研究,以了解这些发现在多大程度上适用于特定的亚人群:本研究已注册为研究登记,编号:5235。5235.Funding:本奖项由国家健康与护理研究所(NIHR)的健康与社会护理服务研究计划(NIHR奖项编号:17/51/08)资助,全文发表于《健康与社会护理服务研究》(Health and Social Care Delivery Research)第12卷第28期。更多奖项信息,请参阅 NIHR Funding and Awards 网站。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信