Author:
Chisolm-Straker Makini,Daul Adrian,McNamara Shannon,Goldman Rhyan,Hajicharalambous Christina,Baluyot Mariju,Cole Michael,Clesca Cindy,Loo George,Janairo Maria-Pamela,Samuels Elizabeth A.,Westafer Lauren,Serrano Felipe,Goldstein Zil
Abstract
Introduction
Transgender and gender non-binary (TGNB) patient care is not routinely taught in medical training. As a result, clinicians frequently lack knowledge regarding gender-affirming practices, surgeries and medications. TGNB-specific health knowledge and care delivery are further negatively impacted by pervasive societal transphobia. Virtual reality (VR)-based instruction may provide learners with opportunities for perspective taking, empathy building and attitudinal shifting to improve care delivery to TGNB patients.
Methods
This was a feasibility trial that compared passive VR and webinar in changing learner attitudes, knowledge and medical decision-making (MDM). Residents were recruited from five US emergency medicine (EM) residencies and were randomized to either VR or webinar educational intervention arm. Pre- and post-intervention assessments were matched using a unique identifier. Participants provided feedback about platform usability.
Results
From August 2020 to October 2021, 206 resident participants were randomized into a case-based VR experience or webinar intervention on TGNB-specific EM medicine; 52 residents completed all three steps of the study. Webinar participants demonstrated more changes in attitudinal statements than VR participants. No improvements in knowledge or MDM were appreciated in either intervention arm. Participants in both arms shared positive and critical feedback about the intervention they accessed, with convenience and ease of use being valued for asynchronous webinar learning.
Discussion
The webinar arm demonstrated a higher increase in empathy or change in attitude compared to VR learners. As VR becomes more technologically agile, accessible and reliable, more work is needed to see if this novel format is an educational tool that closely approximates the standardized patient encounter.
Reference48 articles.
1. 1Crissman HP, Berger MB, Graham LF, Kalton VK. Transgender demographics: a household probability sample of US adults, 2014. American Journal of Public Health. 2016;107:213–215.
2. 2Conron KJ, Scott G, Stowell GS, Landers SJ. Transgender health in Massachusetts: results from a household probability sample of adults. American Journal of Public Health. 2012;102:118–122.
3. 3Meerwijk EL, Sevelius JM. Transgender population size in the United States: a meta-regression of population based probability samples. American Journal of Public Health. 2017;107:216.
4. 4Lombardi EL, Wilchins RA, Priesing D, Malouf D. Gender violence: transgender experiences with violence and discrimination. Journal of Homosexuality. 2001;42:89–101.
5. 5Grant JM, Mottet LA, Tanis J. Injustice at every turn, a report of the National Transgender Discrimination Survey. The National Center for Transgender Equality and the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. 2011. Available from: www.thetaskforce.org/static_html/downloads/reports/reports/ntds_full.pdf [Accessed 24 January 2017].