Uptake, experiences and barriers to cervical screening for trans and non-binary people in Aotearoa New Zealand

Transgender and non-binary peoples experiences of cervical cancer screening: A scoping review

AIM(S)

To synthesise the literature about transgender and non-binary people's experiences of cervical cancer screening and identify ways to improve screening.

BACKGROUND

Transgender people often face barriers to accessing health services including cervical screening, where transgender people have a lower uptake than cisgender women.

DESIGN

A scoping review was undertaken following the Arksey and O'Malley (2005) framework and the PRISMA-ScR checklist. Following database searching of Medline via PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus and CINHAL, 23 papers published between 2008 and 2003 were included. Papers were included if they shared trans and non-binary people's experiences of cervical screening and were written in English. There were no date or geographical data restrictions due to the paucity of research.

RESULTS

Transgender people experience barriers to cervical screening including gender dysphoria, a history of sexual trauma, and mistrust in health professionals or health services, which can result in having negative experiences of screening or avoiding screening. Health professionals can help to create a positive experience by informing themselves about best practices for trans+ health.

CONCLUSION

Changes are required to improve transgender people's experiences and uptake of cervical screening. Improving medical education about trans health and updating health systems would help to combat issues discussed.

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE

Having an understanding of the reasons why accessing health services can be more difficult for transgender people will help health professionals to provide appropriate care for transgender patients. This paper details this in the context of cervical cancer screening and can be applied to other areas of healthcare.

REPORTING METHOD

We have adhered to relevant EQUATOR guidelines and used the PRISMA-ScR reporting method. No Patient or Public Contribution.

Sociodemographic profile, health-related behaviours and experiences of healthcare access in Italian transgender and gender diverse adult population

PURPOSE

Information on the general health of transgender and gender diverse (TGD) individuals continues to be lacking. To bridge this gap, the National Institute of Health in Italy together with the National Office against Racial Discriminations, clinical centres, and TGD organizations carried out a cross-sectional study to define the sociodemographic profile, health-related behaviours, and experiences of healthcare access in Italian TGD adult population.

METHODS

A national survey was conducted by Computer-Assisted Web Interviewing (CAWI) technique. Collected data were compared within the TGD subgroups and between TGD people and the Italian general population (IGP).

RESULTS

TGD respondents were 959: 65% assigned female at birth (AFAB) and 35% assigned male at birth (AMAB). 91.8% and 8.2% were binary and non-binary TGD respondents, respectively. More than 20% of the TGD population reported to be unemployed with the highest rate detectable in AMAB and non-binary people. Cigarette smoking and binge drinking were higher in the TGD population compared with IGP (p < 0.05), affecting TGD subgroups differently. A significant lower percentage of AFAB TGD people reported having had screening for cervical and breast cancer in comparison with AFAB IGP (p < 0.0001, in both cases). Over 40% was the percentage of AFAB and non-binary TGD people accessing healthcare who felt discriminated against because of their gender identity.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results are a first step towards a better understanding of the health needs of TGD people in Italy in order to plan the best policy choices for a more inclusive public health.

What sexual and reproductive health issues do young people want to discuss with a doctor, and why haven't they done so? Findings from an online survey

OBJECTIVE

Young people are a priority group for sexual and reproductive health (SRH) care. We considered which SRH topics young Australians want to discuss with a general practitioner (GP) and explored barriers they encounter to discussing these issues.

METHODS

We conducted an online survey (2nd May - 21st June 2022) of Australians aged 16-29 years. Participants were asked to identify from a list of SRH topics which they wanted to discuss, but never had, with a GP. Those who selected any topic/s (with 'undiscussed SRH issues') were asked a free-text follow-up question about what prevented them from discussing issues. We explored characteristics associated with having undiscussed issues using multivariate logistic regression. Free-text comments were analysed using content analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 1887 people completed relevant survey questions. Most (67.1 %) were women and 48.5 % were heterosexual. Two-thirds (67.0 %) had a usual GP. Nearly half (45.6 %) had undiscussed issues. Most commonly, women wanted to discuss cervical screening and sexual problems, and men wanted to discuss sexual problems and STIs. Participants who were male, older, heterosexual, and with a usual GP were least likely to have undiscussed issues. Barriers to accessing care for SRH were identified from free-text comments, including discomfort, lack of opportunity, fear of negative outcomes, low priority of SRH issues, and perceptions about the role and expertise of GPs.

CONCLUSIONS

Many young people would welcome more preventative SRH care. Young people may be reassured that all issues, including sexual difficulties and dysfunction, are appropriate to discuss with a GP.

Are women-who-have-sex-with-women an 'at-risk' group for cervical cancer? An exploratory study of women in Aotearoa New Zealand

BACKGROUND

International research consistently indicates that women-who-have-sex-with-women (WSW) are less likely to engage in cervical screening than heterosexual women. In the main, studies have explored rates of engagement and highlighted some reasons for non-engagement. This study extends on this work by exploring perceptions among sexual minority women (WSW) for lower rates of engagement among WSW more generally and is the first study on this topic undertaken in Aotearoa New Zealand.

METHODS

A sample of 177 self-identified WSW domiciled in New Zealand completed an online survey about their engagement in cervical screening, reasons for engaging (or not) in cervical screening, and perceptions of why SMW might be less likely to engage in cervical screening.

RESULTS

Fewer than half of participants had engaged in cervical screening every 3years as recommended, with women who had only ever had sex with other women being significantly less likely to have engaged in screening. A lack of clear information about risk relative to sexual history, heteronormativity, and the invasive nature of screening were the dominant reasons for lower engagement among WSW.

CONCLUSIONS

A legacy of misinformation, and endemic heteronormativity in public health messaging around cervical screening is a significant barrier to engagement in screening for WSW. To increase engagement in screening among WSW, public health information needs to specifically address the needs of WSW.

Transgender and gender diverse people with endometriosis: A perspective on affirming gynaecological care

Transgender and gender diverse people presumed female at birth experience gynaecological conditions, such as chronic pelvic pain at elevated rates, estimated to impact between 51% and 72% of this population, compared to rates of up to 26.6% in cisgender women. The negative impact of these conditions is likely amplified due to limited access to safe and affirming healthcare. Despite this high prevalence rate, there is limited research investigating the prevalence, presentation or management options for trans and gender diverse people with endometriosis. Cisgender women with endometriosis report barriers to accessing care, with lengthy times to diagnosis and limited treatment options available. However, barriers for trans and gender diverse individuals are enhanced by physician bias and lack of education in gender-affirming care. This is reflected in stories of discrimination and denial of basic healthcare. A healthcare environment built on the presumption that gynaecological patients are women, others trans and gender diverse patients, which can result in avoidance of needed medical care. A lack of knowledge of gender-affirming care alongside healthcare provider bias highlights a need for gender-affirming care and bias reduction training in undergraduate healthcare provider curricula. Research to date assessing current curriculum in Australia and Aotearoa (New Zealand) shows limited inclusion of lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer, intersex, asexual and other related identities content as a whole with gender-affirming care being among the least-frequently addressed topics. This review will detail barriers to accessing gender-affirming healthcare specific to gynaecology, interweaving the experiences of a non-binary individual seeking access to gender-affirming endometriosis care.

Primary care experiences in the 'Let's test for HPV' study: a qualitative analysis

Introduction The National Cervical Screening Programme (NCSP) will switch from cervical cytology to Human Papillomavirus (HPV) testing as the primary cervical screening modality in 2023. To prepare for rollout an implementation study of HPV testing in primary care commenced in August 2022 in three different geographic regions in NZ. Aims This study explores Primary Care Staff's experience of using the HPV testing pathway in the 'Let's test for HPV' study so that recommendations can be made to improve the testing process before nationwide roll-out. Method Thirty-nine primary care staff were interviewed across all 17 practices in the Capital and Coast, Canterbury and Whanganui region participating in the 'Let's Test For HPV' study. In total 19 interviews took place which followed a semi-structured approach. These interviews were recorded and transcribed. Template analysis was carried out on transcripts to aid in identifying themes. Results Three key themes, with additional subthemes, were identified. Staff were strongly supportive of the new testing regime. Interviewees identified some issues with the new pathway. Educational needs for both patients and clinicians were identified. Conclusion Primary care staff described the experience of using the HPV testing pathway positively; however, there were requests for ongoing additional support and nationwide rollout to be supported by practitioner and patient education programmes. With the right support this new pathway for cervical cancer screening has the potential to improve access for previously underserved and unserved groups.