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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of graduate medical education 2023-10, Vol.15 (5), p.587-591
Hauptverfasser: Aryanpour, Zain, Min-Tran, Dominic, Ghafoor, Essie, Wojcik, Christopher, Peters, Blair R.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung: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.
ISSN:1949-8349
1949-8357
DOI:10.4300/JGME-D-22-00611.1