Past research has established that transgender people experience significant disparities in mental health outcomes and healthcare dissatisfaction compared with cisgender people, but more research is needed on how supportive healthcare interactions relate to the mental health of transgender people. The 2 main aims of our analyses were: (i) to establish the most common negative experiences in healthcare and the most common supportive experiences specifically with primary care doctors for transgender people; and (ii) to examine the association of supportive experiences with mental health variables after controlling for demographic factors. Data from the 2018 Counting Ourselves nationwide survey of transgender people were analysed using regression modelling. The 948 participants with a primary care doctor or general practitioner were included in analyses. Participants were aged 14–83 years old (mean 30.20). The most common supportive experiences involved primary care doctors treating transgender people equitably, with competence, and with respect. Participants with more negative healthcare experiences had higher psychological distress as well as higher likelihood of reporting nonsuicidal self-injury and suicidality. Conversely, participants with more experiences of supportive primary care doctors had lower psychological distress and were less likely to have attempted suicide in the past 12 months. When transgender people receive supportive care from their primary care providers they experience better mental health, despite ongoing negative healthcare experiences. Future research is needed to confirm ways of supporting positive trajectories of mental health for transgender people but these findings demonstrate the importance of positive aspects of care.

Background: Little is known about experiences and barriers for trans and non‐binary (TGNB) people eligible for cervical screening in Aotearoa New Zealand.Aims: To identify uptake, barriers and reasons for delaying cervical cancer screening among TGNB people in Aotearoa.Materials and Methods: The 2018 Counting Ourselves data on TGNB people assigned female at birth aged 20–69 years who had ever had sex, were analysed to report on experiences of those who were eligible for cervical screening (n = 318). Participants answered questions about whether they had taken part in cervical screening and reasons behind any delays in receiving the test.Results: Trans men were more likely than non‐binary participants to report that they did not require cervical screening or were unsure if they needed it. For those who had delayed cervical screening, 30% did so due to feeling worried about how they would be treated as a trans or non‐binary person and 35% due to another reason. Other reasons for delay related to general and gender‐related discomfort, previous traumatic experiences, anxiety or fear of the test and pain. Material barriers to access included cost and lack of information.Conclusions: The current cervical screening program in Aotearoa does not consider the needs of TGNB people, leading to delayed and reduced uptake of cervical screening. Health providers require education on the reasons TGNB people delay or avoid cervical screening in order to provide appropriate information and affirmative healthcare environments. The human papillomavirus self‐swab may address some of the existing barriers.

There is growing recognition that primary care provision plays a pivotal role in improving health outcomes for LGBTQIA+ (rainbow) youth, but few studies have centered on youth experiences of primary care in Aotearoa New Zealand. This study aimed to explore the experiences and perspectives of rainbow youth when engaging with primary care. Two focus groups were held in 2021 with eleven rainbow young people aged 13–23 years recruited with assistance from local rainbow support organizations in Aotearoa NZ. Groups were audio-recorded, transcribed and analyzed using thematic analysis. Four main themes were identified: (i) anticipated and enacted discrimination, (ii) building trust, (iii) confidentiality and (iv) healthcare provider knowledge and competence. Participants spoke of some positive experiences but perceived these to be lucky or surprising, with most also having encountered less supportive interactions and heteronormative views. Visual indicators of rainbow-friendliness in clinic settings were appreciated only if affirmed by inclusive and accepting practice. Frustrations were expressed about gaps in provider knowledge and the sense of having to educate clinicians about rainbow-specific health issues. Primary care providers can facilitate positive consultations with rainbow young people by using clear communication to build trusting relationships, and by being accepting, non-judgmental and transparent about confidentiality.

Background: Rainbow young people (RYP; people of diverse genders, sexualities, and variations in sex characteristics) face barriers accessing primary care, often report negative experiences and the need to educate clinicians on rainbow-specific issues. This study explores general practice staff views and experiences of providing care to RYP. Methods: Three focus groups were held with staff from 5 general practices in an urban area of Aotearoa New Zealand (25 participants in total). Practices were purposively selected to include some known to be more “rainbow-friendly” seeing larger numbers of RYP and some with no particular focus on RYP. All members of each practice were invited to participate, including administration and reception staff. Focus groups were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analysed in NVivo using inductive thematic analysis. Results: Four main themes were identified: (i) Practice experience, (ii) Feeling awkward, (iii) Knowledge and training, and (iv) Structural barriers. Differences were apparent in health provider knowledge, comfort, and experience in providing care to RYP. Participants identified a lack of knowledge and training and wanted more resources and education. Systems limitations were common (e.g. with IT systems for recording gender) and often contributed to awkward clinical encounters. Conclusions: Participants recognized shortcomings in their training, knowledge, and level of confidence providing care to RYP and expressed a desire to improve their competency. Further work is needed to identify and trial practical strategies that help improve communication skills, knowledge, and the delivery of more equitable healthcare to RYP.

Introduction: Education on health care for patients with diverse sexual orientation, sex characteristics and gender identities is lacking in Aotearoa’s medical schools. Aim: This study surveyed fifth-year medical students at the University of Otago Wellington (UOW) about confidence in providing health care to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex and asexual (LGBTQIA+) patients to identify learning needs. Methods: This anonymous cross-sectional survey was designed with input from an advisory group (community members, education, research and subject matter experts). It was administered on paper during class, using Likert scales (level of agreement) and open-ended questions. All fifth-year medical students at the UOW campus were invited to participate in May 2021. Data were analysed in Microsoft Excel (Microsoft Corporation) and free-text comments were analysed using template analysis. Results: In total, 74.7% (71/95) of students completed a survey. Participants lacked knowledge and confidence in their consultation skills with LGBTQIA+ patients and did not feel they had enough teaching in this area. Most (≥78.8%) were comfortable with common terms, but half or fewer could explain intersex, gender affirmation and Takatāpui. Free-text comments revealed learning needs relating to consultation skills, ways to approach this topic with sensitivity, and a desire to learn more about the cultural context. Discussion: Medical students view LGBTQIA+ health care as an important topic and want opportunities to improve knowledge and confidence in this area. Students lack confidence in consulting with LGBTQIA+ patients, suggesting that more education focused on practical experience and interactions with real patients would be of benefit.

Internationally, undergraduate medical education is not currently enabling early career doctors to meet the needs of trans and gender diverse (TGD) people as healthcare consumers. This review outlines inclusion of TGD education in undergraduate medical education more broadly to contextualise curriculum development needs in obstetrics, gynaecology and reproductive medicine in Aotearoa/New Zealand. Limited, and lack of integrated content, teaching capability and current absence of TGD health knowledge as graduate outcomes, compounded by pedagogy (biomedical/binary framing) and more appropriate learning resources are indicators for curricula, and workforce, development.