Genders and Individual Treatment Progress in (Non-)Binary Trans Individuals

Background: Health care for transgender and transsexual (ie, trans) individuals has long been based on a binary understanding of gender (ie, feminine vs masculine). However, the existence of non-binary or genderqueer (NBGQ) genders is increasingly recognized by academic and/or health care professionals. Aim: To gain insight into the individual health care experiences and needs of binary and NBGQ individuals to improve their health care outcomes and experience. Methods: Data were collected using an online survey study on experiences with trans health care. The non-clinical sample consisted of 415 trans individuals. An individual treatment progress score was calculated to report and compare participants' individual progress toward treatment completion and consider the individual treatment needs and definitions of completed treatment (ie, amount and types of different treatments needed to complete one's medical transition). Outcomes: Main outcome measures were (i) general and trans-related sociodemographic data and (ii) received and planned treatments. Results: Participants reported binary (81.7%) and different NBGQ (18.3%) genders. The 2 groups differed significantly in basic demographic data (eg, mean age; P < .05). NBGQ participants reported significantly fewer received treatments compared with binary participants. For planned treatments, binary participants reported more treatments related to primary sex characteristics only. Binary participants required more treatments for a completed treatment than NBGQ participants (6.0 vs 4.0). There were no differences with regard to individual treatment progress score. Clinical Translation: Because traditional binary-focused treatment practice could have hindered NBGQ individuals from accessing trans health care or sufficiently articulating their needs, health care professionals are encouraged to provide a holistic and individual treatment approach and acknowledge genders outside the gender binary to address their needs appropriately. Strengths and Limitations: Because the study was made inclusive for non-patients and individuals who decided against trans health care, bias from a participant-patient double role was prevented, which is the reason the results are likely to have a higher level of validity than a clinical sample. However, because of the anonymity of an online survey, it remains unclear whether NBGQ individuals live according to their gender identity in their everyday life. Conclusion: The study highlights the broad spectrum of genders in trans-individuals and associated health care needs and provides a novel approach to measure individual treatment progress in trans individuals. Copyright (C) 2017, International Society for Sexual Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.