Characteristics of a transgender and gender-diverse patient population in Utah: Use of electronic health records to advance clinical and health equity research.

Transgender and gender-diverse (TGD) people, individuals whose gender identity differs from their sex assigned at birth, face unique challenges in accessing gender-affirming care and often experience disparities in a variety of health outcomes. Clinical research on TGD health is limited by a lack of standardization on how to best identify these individuals. The objective of this retrospective cohort analysis was to accurately identify and describe TGD adults and their use of gender-affirming care from 2003-2023 in a healthcare system in Utah, United States. International Classification of Disease (ICD)-9 and 10 codes and surgical procedure codes, along with sexual orientation and gender identity data were used to develop a dataset of 4,587 TGD adults. During this time frame, 2,985 adults received gender-affirming hormone therapy (GAHT) and/or gender-affirming surgery (GAS) within one healthcare system. There was no significant difference in race or ethnicity between TGD adults who received GAHT and/or GAS compared to TGD adults who did not receive such care. TGD adults who received GAHT and/or GAS were more likely to have commercial insurance coverage, and adults from rural communities were underrepresented. Patients seeking estradiol-based GAHT tended to be older than those seeking testosterone-based GAHT. The first GAS occurred in 2013, and uptake of GAS have doubled since 2018. This study provides a methodology to identify and examine TGD patients in other health systems and offers insights into emerging trends and access to gender-affirming care.

Power, policy, and transgender identities: A case study of gatekeeping by mental health professionals in accessing gender affirming surgeries in India.

BACKGROUND: Transgender individuals seeking gender-affirming surgeries (GAS) are often denied or delayed by mental health professionals (MHPs). Studies on the gatekeeping of GAS have been mainly conducted in the Global North and primarily focus on the perspectives of health professionals. This case study from India incorporates health professional, community, advocate, and activist perspectives to contribute new evidence about MHP gatekeeping in GAS. The study aims to examine the role of power and gender in MHP gatekeeping of GAS in India. METHODS: A qualitative multi-method case study including thematic analyses of key informant interviews (n = 9) and policy analysis using the policy triangle framework. RESULTS: Health professionals and transgender persons participate in the construction, performance, and reproduction of gender indicating the persistence of gender normativity in India which enables gatekeeping by MHPs. However, evidence suggests some signs of a change from binormativity to a culturally intelligible and historically familiar "trinormativity". CONCLUSION: To understand MHP gatekeeping, there is a need to contextualise this example of biopower within the larger social construction of gender within which MHPs operate. A transition from binormativity to "trinormativity" enables MHP gatekeeping of transgender persons seeking GAS. This risks creating new forms of gender-related oppression, such as new hierarchies and class differences between the gender binary and the "third gender".

Paucity of Online Information About Gender-Affirming Surgery Fellowships in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Despite growing demand for gender-affirming surgery (GAS), there are few formal GAS fellowships in the United States. Paucity of online information about GAS fellowships may discourage potential applicants and decrease the visibility of the field. Thus, it is important to analyze the existing online information about GAS fellowships to improve fellow recruitment and patient outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To identify the number of GAS fellowship websites (GASFWs) and evaluate their robustness. Second, to report the social media presence of GAS fellowships. METHODS: To identify GASFWs, existing databases sponsored by plastic surgery associations and Google query were used between April and May 2023. Thirty-five independent variables based on previously published data were evaluated for presence in a bivariate fashion on GASFWs. Accounts on popular social media websites were also identified by Google query. Website and social media analysis were also done for GAS fellowships that were offered by departments/specialties other than plastic surgery. RESULTS: In total, only 6 GASFWs associated with plastic surgery departments were identified and analyzed. Eight nonplastic surgery GASFWs were included for analysis. Overall, both categories of GASFWs were not robust; key information such as previous fellow listing and selection criteria was often missing. Furthermore, important topics specifically related to GAS such as community engagement and programmatic building are often not found on GASFWs either. In addition, none of the fellowships had any independent Facebook, Instagram, or Twitter. CONCLUSIONS: To ensure patient safety and quality outcomes, it is important to promote GAS by recruiting more applicants for specialized training beyond residency. With increased Internet use, improving GASFWs and social media presence as well as considering the use of a centralized database or match system can foster the growth of the field.

Prospective assessment of the quality of life and nipple sensation after gender-affirming chest surgery.

BACKGROUND: In the existing literature, assessing transgender patients' quality of life after surgery, especially using standardized surveys, is rare. The nipple sensation regarding the operating technique has neither been studied in a prospective nor standardized way. METHODS: For one year, we prospectively assessed transgender patients operated on for a gender-affirming chest surgery in our unit. Each patient answered the BREAST-Q© survey and the BODY-Q© chest module survey before and six months after the surgery. In addition, a measure of nipple sensation was performed using Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments pre-and post-operatively to compare surgical techniques. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients (102 breasts) were included in our study. The average age was 23.1 years and the average BMI was 24.8 kg/m2. Twenty-one patients (45%) had double incision and free nipple graft mastectomy, 14 (27%) patients had double incision and inferior pedicle mastectomy, while the 14 (27%) other patients had a semi-circular technique. Our study shows an improvement in all the scores of the surveys after surgery (p < 0.0001). Patients with double incision and inferior pedicle mastectomies rated a significantly higher satisfaction with nipples (p = 0.013) and significantly better sexual well-being (p = 0.007) than other techniques. In addition, preservation of nipple sensation was shown in patients operated by semi-circular technique (p < 0.001) and inferior pedicle technique (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Our prospective study confirms the significant improvement in the quality of life of transgender patients after chest gender-affirming surgery. Double incision with inferior pedicle seems to provide better satisfaction with nipples, higher sexual well-being, and preservation of nipple sensation.

Trends of Medicare Reimbursement Rates for Gender-Affirming Surgery Procedures.

BACKGROUND: Awareness of Medicare reimbursement is important for gender-affirming surgeons who treat transgender patients with Medicare. In 2014, Medicare began to provide coverage for medically necessary transition-related surgery. The purpose of this study was to analyze trends in Medicare reimbursement rates for gender-affirming surgery procedures from 2014 to 2022. METHODS: The Medicare Physician Fee Schedule Look-Up Tool provided by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services was used, and the Current Procedural Terminology codes for 43 gender-affirming surgery services were obtained. Monetary units, conversion factors, relative value units (RVUs) for work, facility, and malpractice costs for 30 transmasculine and 13 transfeminine procedures were analyzed. Descriptive statistics were performed to account for inflation and to determine the relative differences between 2014 and 2022. RESULTS: For all gender-affirming surgery procedures covered by Medicare, the average relative difference of monetary units decreased by 2.99% between 2014 and 2022. On average, there was a 3.97% decrease of work-based RVU charges for transmasculine procedures and a 1.73% decrease of work-based RVU charges for transfeminine procedures. After adjusting for inflation, the average relative difference of monetary units for all gender-affirming surgery procedures decreased by 23.42% between 2014 and 2022. CONCLUSIONS: Reimbursement rates for gender-affirming surgery procedures covered under Medicare have decreased over the observed period, and trends in reimbursement rates have not kept up with consumer price index inflation. Gender-affirming surgeons should be conscious of these changes in reimbursement rates and advocate for fairer compensation to promote medical care among an underserved population.

Gender dysphoria and gender-affirming surgery: The New York state experience.

BACKGROUND: Transgender and gender nonconforming (TGNC) individuals experience incongruence between their self-identified gender versus their birth-assigned sex. In some cases, TGNC patients undergo gender-affirming surgical (GAS) procedures. Although GAS is an evolving surgical field, there is currently limited literature documenting patient characteristics and procedures. Addressing this knowledge gap, this retrospective cohort analysis described the characteristics of New York State's TGNC residents with gender dysphoria (GD) diagnosis, including patients undergoing at least one gender-affirming surgical procedure. METHODS: Using the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (SPARCS) database from 2002 to 2018, we identified patients' first-time TCNC records and their risk characteristics. Patients who received GAS procedures were sub-classified as top-only, bottom-only, or combined top/bottom procedures and were compared with TGNC patients who did not receive GAS. RESULTS: Of 24,615 records extracted from TGNC SPARCS database, 11,427 (46.4%) were transmasculine (female-to-male) and 13,188 (53.6%) were transfeminine (male-to-female). Overall, 2.73% of transgender patients received at least one GAS procedure. Of these patients, 78.2% had masculinizing and 21.8% had feminizing surgeries. After a diagnosis of GD, the positive predictors for a GAS-based procedure included female birth sex, pediatric age (<18 years) or older age (60+ years), commercial insurance coverage, and Hispanic race. In contrast, negative GAS predictors included male birth sex and government insurance coverage (i.e., Medicare and Medicaid). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with transgender women, transgender men were more likely to receive at least one GAS procedure. Because the race, ethnicity, and payor status of TGNC patients can impact GAS treatment rates, additional research is warranted to examine post-diagnosis GAS treatment disparities among TGNC patients.

Surgical Standards of Care and Insurance Authorization of Gender-Affirming Facial Surgery.

Transgender and gender-diverse patients face complex, multifactorial barriers to medically necessary gender-affirming care. Insurance coverage for facial feminizing and masculinizing surgeries is one such obstacle. Providers and affiliated team members must have a comprehensive understanding of clinical standards of care, medical documentation, insurance policy and terminology, and related legislation to successfully navigate this administrative quagmire and ensure patient access to care..

Variability in Medicaid Coverage for Gender-affirming Surgeries Across U.S. States.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the current Medicaid coverage landscape for gender-affirming surgery across the United States at the procedure level and identify factors associated with coverage. BACKGROUND: Medicaid coverage for gender-affirming surgery differs by state, despite a federal ban on gender identity-based discrimination in health insurance. States that cover gender-affirming surgery also differ in which procedures are included in Medicaid coverage, leading to confusion among patients and clinicians. METHODS: State Medicaid policies in 2021 for gender-affirming surgery were queried for each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia (D.C.). State partisanship, state-level Medicaid protections, and coverage of gender-affirming procedures in 2021 were recorded. The linear correlation between electorate partisanship and total procedures covered was assessed. Pairwise t tests were used to compare coverage based on state partisanship and the presence or absence of state-level Medicaid protections. RESULTS: Medicaid coverage for gender-affirming surgery was covered in 30 states and Washington, D.C. The most commonly covered procedures were genital surgeries and mastectomy (n = 31), followed by breast augmentation (n = 21), facial feminization (n = 12), and voice modification surgery (n = 4). More procedures were covered in Democrat-controlled or leaning states, as well as in states with explicit protections for gender-affirming care in Medicaid coverage. CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid coverage for gender-affirming surgery is patchwork across the United States and is especially poor for facial and voice surgeries. Our study provides a convenient reference for patients and surgeons detailing which gender-affirming surgical procedures are covered by Medicaid within each state.

Developing Gender-Affirming Surgery Curricula for Plastic Surgery Residency and Fellowship via Delphi Consensus.

BACKGROUND: Gender-affirming surgery (GAS) is a rapidly growing field within plastic surgery, and residents and fellows must receive appropriate training. However, there are no standardized surgical training curricula. The objective of this study was to identify core curricula within the field of GAS. METHODS: Four GAS surgeons from different academic institutions identified initial curricular statements within six categories: (1) comprehensive GAS care, (2) gender-affirming facial surgery, (3) masculinizing chest surgery, (4) feminizing breast augmentation, (5) masculinizing genital GAS, and (6) feminizing genital GAS. Expert panelists consisting of plastic surgery residency program directors and GAS surgeons were recruited for three rounds of the Delphi-consensus process. The panelists decided whether each curriculum statement was appropriate for residency, fellowship, or neither. A statement was included in the final curriculum when Cronbach α value was greater than or equal to 0.8, meaning that 80% or more of the panel agreed on inclusion. RESULTS: A total of 34 panelists (14 plastic surgery residency program directors and 20 GAS surgeons representing 28 US institutions) participated. The response rate was 85% for the first round, 94% for the second, and 100% for the third. Out of 124 initial curriculum statements, 84 reached consensus for the final GAS curricula, 51 for residency, and 31 for fellowship. CONCLUSIONS: A national consensus on core GAS curriculum for plastic surgery residency and GAS fellowship was achieved by a modified Delphi method. Implementation of this curriculum will ensure that trainees in plastic surgery are adequately prepared in the field of GAS.

Geographic Variability of Genital Gender-Affirming Surgery Centers and Costs of Hospitalization.

PURPOSE: The cost of gender-affirming surgery (GAS) is an important component of healthcare accessibility for transgender patients. However, GAS is often prohibitively expensive, particularly as there are inconsistencies in insurance coverages. Variability in hospital costs has been documented for other types of nonplastic surgery procedures; however, this analysis has not been done for GAS. To better understand the financial barriers impairing access to equitable transgender care, this study analyzes the distribution of hospitals that perform genital GAS and the associated costs of inpatient genital GAS. METHODS: This is a study of the 2016-2019 National Inpatient Sample database. Transgender patients undergoing genital GAS were identified using International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, diagnosis and procedure codes, and patients undergoing concurrent chest wall GAS were excluded. Descriptive statistics were done on patient sociodemographic variables, hospital characteristics, and hospitalization costs. χ2 test was used to assess for differences between categorical variables and Mood's median test was used to assess for differences between continuous variable medians. RESULTS: A total of 3590 weighted genital GAS encounters were identified. The Western region (50.8%) and Northeast (32.3%) performed the greatest proportion of GAS, compared with the Midwest (9.1%) and the South (8.0%) (P < 0.0001). The most common payment source was private insurance (62.8%), followed by public insurance (27.3%). There were significant differences in the variability of median hospital costs across regions (P < 0.0001). The South and Midwest had the greatest median cost for vaginoplasty ($19,935; interquartile range [IQR], $16,162-$23,561; P = 0.0009), while the West had the greatest median cost for phalloplasty ($26,799; IQR, $19,667-$30,826; P = 0.0152). Across both procedures, the Northeast had the lowest median cost ($11,421; IQR, $9155-$13,165 and $10,055; IQR, $9,013-$10,377, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: There is significant regional variability in the number of GAS procedures performed and their associated hospitalization costs. The identified disparities in insurance coverage present an area of possible future improvement to alleviate the financial burden GAS presents to gender-discordant individuals. The variability in cost suggests a need to evaluate variations in care, leading to cost standardization.

Are We Teaching Evidence-Based and Inclusive Practices in Gender-Affirming Care? Perspectives From Plastic Surgery In-Service Examinations.

Background Resident physicians take annual in-service examinations (ISEs) as part of continuing medical education, which set educational priorities, allow for formative feedback, and guide preparation for final board examinations. Gender-affirming care is provided in many specialties but has been an underrepresented area in medical education. Plastic surgeons provide a large portion of gender-affirming surgical care. Educational gaps in standardized ISEs may contribute to ongoing health care disparities for transgender and gender diverse people. Objective To evaluate the quality of content pertaining to gender-affirming surgery (GAS) on plastic surgery ISEs. Methods Plastic surgery ISEs from years 2012 to 2020 were accessed online through the American Council of Academic Plastic Surgeons website in June 2022. All 5 gender diverse authors analyzed examinations for the presence of GAS questions; identified questions were analyzed for quantity, organization based on content category, affirming language, and accuracy against current guidelines. Results Of 1959 ISE questions available for review, 11 GAS questions were identified for a total frequency of 0.56%. Most GAS questions (6 of 11, 55%) were miscategorized. Inappropriate language, including misgendering of patients, occurred in 7 of 11 (64%) questions. No questions discussed GAS beyond chest or genital surgery, or common variations of these procedures. Transgender identities were represented as only binary, with no mention of nonbinary or gender-fluid individuals. Conclusions Our study illustrates that there are significant gaps in educational content pertaining to gender-affirming care on plastic surgery ISEs.

Travel distance and national access to gender-affirming surgery.

BACKGROUND: Gender-affirming surgery is unequally distributed across the United States due to resource allocation, state-based regulations, and the availability of trained physicians. Many individuals seeking gender-affirming surgery travel vast distances to receive care. This study aims to quantify the distances that individuals travel to receive gender-affirming surgery based on procedure type and patient home-of-record location. METHODS: Patients in the Optum Clinformatics Data Mart who underwent gender-affirming surgery were identified via Current Procedural Terminology codes. Data on patient demographics, procedural care, and location of patient and provider were collected. To be included, a patient had to meet diagnostic criteria to receive gender-affirming surgery and have a recorded surgical procedure reimbursed as part of gender-affirming surgery per the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services guidelines. Patients residing or receiving care outside the continental United States were excluded. Distances between the ZIP Code of each patient's home of record and the location where the gender-affirming surgery was performed were calculated via the Google Maps Distance Matrix API. Distance traveled for gender-affirming surgery by patient state and gender-affirming surgery procedure were determined. Multivariate linear regression analysis determined predictors of distance traveled for gender-affirming surgery, whereas multivariate logistic regression identified variables associated with an increased likelihood of out-of-state travel to gender-affirming surgery. RESULTS: Across 86 million longitudinal patient records, the study population included 2,743 records corresponding to 1,735 patients who received gender-affirming surgery between January 2003 and June 2020. The median distance traveled for gender-affirming surgery was 191 miles (mean: 391.5), and 36.0% of patients traveled out of their state of residence. Every patient from West Virginia, Wyoming, South Dakota, Mississippi, and Delaware traveled out of state for gender-affirming surgery. Patients with homes of record in California (18.4%), Massachusetts (20.7%), and Oregon (19.0%) were the least likely to travel out-of-state for gender-affirming surgery out of states with more than 10 gender-affirming surgery encounters. The main predictors for out-of-state travel included both feminizing and masculinizing genital surgery, as well as an insurance coverage with increased provider options. Additionally, patients traveled shorter distances for gender-affirming surgery after the post-2014 Affordable Care Act expansion compared to pre-2014. CONCLUSION: Patients receiving gender-affirming surgery in the United States travel great distances for their care, often receiving their care from out-of-state providers. Restrictive guidelines imposed by state laws on both the access to and provision of gender-affirming surgery compound the myriad of common difficulties that patients face. It is imperative to discuss potential factors that may mitigate these barriers for those who require gender-affirming surgery.

Impact of financial well-being on gender affirmation surgery access and hospital course.

BACKGROUND: Although gender affirmation surgery (GAS) can effectively treat gender dysphoria, it remains one of the most expensive components of gender affirming care. This study aims to identify the impact of financial well-being on GAS access and hospital course in the United States. METHODS: The National Inpatient Sample database was queried from 2012 to 2019. US transgender patients undergoing GAS were identified. Predictors included patient sociodemographic variables. Outcomes included hospitalization course variables. Regression modeling was used to assess the relationship between predictor and outcome variables. Significance was set at α = 0.05. RESULTS: A total of 5620 weighted GAS encounters were identified (genital surgery 92.3%, chest surgery 16.6%). 1825 (32.5%) patients were in the highest income bracket, compared with 1120 (19.9%) patients in the lowest bracket. Higher income was associated with younger age at the time of GAS. Patients in the highest income quartile were also 3.7 times more likely to be funded by private insurance and self-pay options than those in the lowest income quartile (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.1-4.4, p < 0.0001). Additionally, patients in the lowest income quartile were 4.2 times more likely to require either home healthcare or transfer to a nursing facility post discharge than those in the highest income quartile (95% CI: 3.1-5.8, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: To promote equitable care to transgender patients, efforts to reduce financial barriers to healthcare access are much needed, particularly through broader insurance coverage of GAS procedures. Broadly, our results highlight the impact of socioeconomic variables on healthcare access and outcomes.

Legitimacy of Cost Concern for Health Insurance Coverage of Gender-Affirming Surgeries: Comparison of the Interest in Keeping Insurance Cost Down versus the Cost-Effectiveness of Including Gender-Affirming Surgeries in Employer Health Insurance Plans.

This RCD discusses the recent development in Lange v Houston County. In this case, the United States District Court for The Middle District Of Georgia Macon Division found that an Exclusion Policy, prohibiting health insurance coverage of gender-affirming surgery for an employee, Anna Lange, violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. On appeal, the Defendants argued that the District Court erred in its decision and relied on the cost burden of gender-affirming surgery as one of their defenses. This RCD highlights that cost is a common defense tactic used by defendants in these cases. However, the author argues that these concerns are unfounded and meritless given the cost-effectiveness of including gender-affirming surgeries in health insurance plans, as highlighted in the RCD.

Getting to Yes: Navigating the Insurance Gauntlet.

Insurance coverage of gender-affirming surgeries including facial and vocal feminization surgery remains a challenge for many patients, physicians, and practice administrators. These challenges range from disparities in coverage for commercial versus public insurance carriers, in network versus out of network benefits, preauthorization struggles, and the lack of standard coverage policies. This article aims to describe the insurance coverage and approval challenges related to facial feminization surgery and to provide guidance for surgeons and their practice administrators on how to obtain successful preauthorization/predetermination, single case agreements, and proper claim adjudication.