How doctors think about their role in transgender care: a qualitative study of UK general practitioners and endocrinologists.

IF 7.1 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Jonathan Franklin, Apoorva Thakur, Vinod Patel
{"title":"How doctors think about their role in transgender care: a qualitative study of UK general practitioners and endocrinologists.","authors":"Jonathan Franklin, Apoorva Thakur, Vinod Patel","doi":"10.1177/01410768251363407","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>ObjectivesTransgender people in the UK face uncertainties and inequalities in healthcare provision, especially for treatment required for gender transition. Existing studies have found that doctors' ideological tendencies, in particular socially normative conceptions of gender, influence their treatment of gender minority patients. This study explores doctors' understanding of their role in transgender care, their thoughts on the current processes in place to enable gender affirmation, and their theoretical views of sex/gender that underpin these conceptions.DesignOne-on-one, semi-structured online interviews. Clinicians were recruited through societies representing both specialties and then snowballed. Recruitment stopped with data sufficiency, according to the tenets of 'information power'. Data analysis was conducted in line with Braun and Clarke's Reflexive Thematic Analysis guidelines.SettingUK doctors working in general practice and endocrinology.ParticipantsConvenience and purposive sampling of 16 participants (8 endocrinologists and 8 general practitioners).Main outcome measuresOur dataset explores clinicians' conceptions of their role in transgender care and identifies current structural and organisational obstacles.ResultsThe interviews found that the division of labour in transgender care is contested. GPs felt their role was to understand the patient's narrative, and therefore were reluctant to prescribe, believing this to be within the purview of specialists. Endocrinologists described themselves as 'technicians' simply carrying out the task of providing hormonal treatment. Almost all interviewees emphasised the importance of multidisciplinary involvement, and none were willing to treat without a mental health professional.ConclusionsOur findings suggest that doctors may inadvertently communicate gender norms, but that they do so within the constraints of a system over which they have limited control, and that their conceptions of transgender care are informed by serious resource pressures. We offer some practical suggestions for how these pressures could be ameliorated.</p>","PeriodicalId":17271,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"1410768251363407"},"PeriodicalIF":7.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12339493/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01410768251363407","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ObjectivesTransgender people in the UK face uncertainties and inequalities in healthcare provision, especially for treatment required for gender transition. Existing studies have found that doctors' ideological tendencies, in particular socially normative conceptions of gender, influence their treatment of gender minority patients. This study explores doctors' understanding of their role in transgender care, their thoughts on the current processes in place to enable gender affirmation, and their theoretical views of sex/gender that underpin these conceptions.DesignOne-on-one, semi-structured online interviews. Clinicians were recruited through societies representing both specialties and then snowballed. Recruitment stopped with data sufficiency, according to the tenets of 'information power'. Data analysis was conducted in line with Braun and Clarke's Reflexive Thematic Analysis guidelines.SettingUK doctors working in general practice and endocrinology.ParticipantsConvenience and purposive sampling of 16 participants (8 endocrinologists and 8 general practitioners).Main outcome measuresOur dataset explores clinicians' conceptions of their role in transgender care and identifies current structural and organisational obstacles.ResultsThe interviews found that the division of labour in transgender care is contested. GPs felt their role was to understand the patient's narrative, and therefore were reluctant to prescribe, believing this to be within the purview of specialists. Endocrinologists described themselves as 'technicians' simply carrying out the task of providing hormonal treatment. Almost all interviewees emphasised the importance of multidisciplinary involvement, and none were willing to treat without a mental health professional.ConclusionsOur findings suggest that doctors may inadvertently communicate gender norms, but that they do so within the constraints of a system over which they have limited control, and that their conceptions of transgender care are informed by serious resource pressures. We offer some practical suggestions for how these pressures could be ameliorated.

医生如何看待他们在跨性别护理中的角色:一项对英国全科医生和内分泌学家的定性研究。
目的英国的变性人在医疗保健方面面临着不确定性和不平等,特别是在变性所需的治疗方面。现有研究发现,医生的思想倾向,特别是社会规范的性别观念,会影响他们对性别少数患者的治疗。本研究探讨了医生对他们在跨性别护理中的角色的理解,他们对当前实现性别确认的流程的看法,以及他们对支撑这些概念的性/性别的理论观点。设计一对一、半结构化的在线面试。临床医生是通过代表这两个专业的协会招募的,然后呈滚雪球般的增长。根据“信息力量”的原则,在数据充足的情况下,招聘就停止了。数据分析是根据Braun和Clarke的反思性主题分析准则进行的。英国医生从事全科和内分泌学的工作。方便和有目的的抽样16名参与者(8名内分泌科医生和8名全科医生)。主要结果测量我们的数据集探讨了临床医生对他们在跨性别护理中的角色的概念,并确定了当前的结构和组织障碍。结果访谈发现,跨性别护理的分工存在争议。全科医生认为他们的角色是理解病人的叙述,因此不愿意开处方,认为这是专家的职权范围。内分泌学家称自己是“技术人员”,只是在执行提供激素治疗的任务。几乎所有的受访者都强调多学科参与的重要性,没有人愿意在没有心理健康专业人员的情况下进行治疗。结论:我们的研究结果表明,医生可能会无意中传达性别规范,但他们是在一个他们无法控制的系统的约束下这样做的,他们对跨性别护理的概念是由严重的资源压力所决定的。我们就如何减轻这些压力提出了一些切实可行的建议。
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
8.40
自引率
3.50%
发文量
107
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Since 1809, the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine (JRSM) has been a trusted source of information in the medical field. Our publication covers a wide range of topics, including evidence-based reviews, original research papers, commentaries, and personal perspectives. As an independent scientific and educational journal, we strive to foster constructive discussions on vital clinical matters. While we are based in the UK, our articles address issues that are globally relevant and of interest to healthcare professionals worldwide.
×
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