Advances in diagnosis and care of persons with DSD over the last decade

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.

DSD/intersex: historical context and current perspectives

Intersex/Disorders/Differences of sex development conditions have been recognized for millennia. An organized approach was adopted in the 1960-70s using the philosophy that gender identity was fluid and malleable. Consequences of this approach were the lack of disclosure, stigmatization, and excessive surgery to "normalize" the genitalia. Often this led to quality of life issues for those patients. There have been many modifications in approach since then to avoid the problems noted. There is consensus on many of these changes (e.g. disclosure) but continued controversy on others (e.g. the benefits of early surgery). This review summarizes the historical context and the current areas of consensus and controversy.

Health intervention experiences and associated mental health outcomes in a sample of LGBTQ people with intersex variations in Australia

People with intersex variation/s have sex characteristics determined by reproductive anatomy or chromosomal, gonadal, or hormonal expressions that are not typical of medical and societal norms for male or female bodies and are widely subjected to irreversible medical interventions at an early age to reinforce sex assignment. These interventions may be accompanied by experiences of lack of autonomy for the individual and, at times, lack of fully informed consent on the part of the individual or their parents/carers. People with intersex variations additionally experience high rates of mental health concerns relating to stigma, discrimination and poor healthcare experiences. The intersections between LGBTQ identities and intersex variations are poorly understood but are important given a high proportion of people with intersex variations identify as LGBTQ. This study explored associations between healthcare experiences and mental health outcomes among 46 LGBTQ people aged between 18 and 67 years old with intersex variations in Australia. Findings provide evidence of associations between suicidal thinking, suicidal attempts, depression or anxiety and negative healthcare experiences, including limited autonomy and consent, and challenges accessing psychological support. These highlight the need for further research and proactive intervention to advance human rights and improve health outcomes for this population.

Differences of Sex Development: What Neonatologists Need to Know

Differences of sex development (DSD) refer to rare conditions in which an individual's sex development is different from typical male or female development. The neonatologist is often the first health care provider to interact with parents of newborns with DSD and must be familiar with the approach to patients with DSD. In this article, we discuss definition of DSD, initial workup of the patient with DSD, terminology, and controversies in care.

Differences/Disorders of Sex Development: Medical Conditions at the Intersection of Sex and Gender

Defined as congenital conditions in which development of chromosomal, gonadal, or anatomic sex is atypical, differences or disorders of sex development (DSDs) comprise many discrete diagnoses ranging from those associated with few phenotypic differences between affected and unaffected individuals to those where questions arise regarding gender of rearing, gonadal tumor risk, genital surgery, and fertility. Controversies exist in numerous areas including how DSDs are conceptualized, how to refer to the set of conditions and those affected by them, and aspects of clinical management that extend from social media to legislative bodies, courts of law, medicine, clinical practice, and scholarly research in psychology and sociology. In addition to these aspects, this review covers biological and social influences on psychosocial development and adjustment, the psychosocial and psychosexual adaptation of people born with DSDs, and roles for clinical psychologists in the clinical management of DSDs. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, Volume 18 is May 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

Individualized care for patients with intersex (disorders/differences of sex development): part I

The care of individuals with disorders/differences of sex development aims to enable affected individuals and their families to have the best quality of life, particularly those born with severe genital ambiguity. Two of the biggest concerns for parents and health professionals are: (1) making a gender assignment and (2) the decisions of whether or not surgery is indicated, and if so, when is best for the patient and parents. These decisions, which can be overwhelming to families, are almost always made in the face of uncertainties. Such decisions must involve the parents, include multidisciplinary contributions, have an underlying principle of full disclosure, and respect familial, philosophical, and cultural values. Assignment as male or female is made with the realization that gender identity cannot be predicted with certainty. Because of the variability among those with the same diagnosis and complexity of phenotype-genotype correlation, the use of algorithms is inappropriate. The goal of this article is to emphasize the need for individualized care to make the best possible decisions for each patient's unique situation.