People who underwent gender-affirming chest reconstruction surgeries as adults have virtually no regrets years later and overwhelmingly high levels of satisfaction with their decision to have the procedure, according to a study published Wednesday in JAMA Surgery. The results were so clear, in fact, that the study authors were unable to perform the complex statistical analyses they had planned due to the striking uniformity in the survey responses.
Overall, this study on adults adds to a limited, but growing body of data suggesting that gender-affirming care is “essential” and potentially life-saving care that comes with significant benefits for people who are transgender and gender diverse. Collectively, this is why major medical organizations—including the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Psychological Association, and the Endocrine Society—advocate for protecting access to evidence-based gender-affirming care, which is a broad, sometimes misconstrued, term.
It’s great to have additional studies confirming this! But this is also what the trans community has been saying for years. Please just listen to us when it comes to our own bodies 🥲
But isn’t this study exactly about asking trans folks how they feel about their top surgery? Not doing a study however would be ignoring the ones who didn’t feel satisfied with their surgery, and now those voices are included as well. They’re in the minority as expected, but at least now we have some sort of statistical validation for it as well
This is hardly the first study to look at satisfaction with gender confirmation surgery results.
Yeah, there’s been a number on both surgery and HRT, as well as plenty of studies on the effects of supporting trans people - especially trans kids.
I even remember a series of studies that found that HRT had a 90% success rate among patients. 90% of people in the study said that there had been either an improvement or at least no change in the quality of their life after they started compared to before, and of the 10% who didn’t, many of them cited outside factors as being the cause of their issues. Stuff like unsupportive family and harassment/hate crimes were some of the most common factors, and post HRT regret being the least common factor. The majority of that 10% said they would be starting HRT again as soon as they were in a position where they safely could.
I was more referring to the common knowledge among the trans community that already knew this information prior to any studies. If you’re trans and in the community this is a “well no shit” kind of study. We’ve been telling it to cis people for years but the refusal to listen to that was palpable. That’s why I said it’s great to have additional studies to point to if they don’t want to listen to the trans community themselves, they can maybe listen to this study.
Even if it seems to be common sense to those inside the community, there is something to be said about getting actual data on the subject so that those outside the community at least have a touchstone for the reality those on the inside experience, because propagandists are working very hard to muddy the waters on this point and points like this one in particular. It might be a “no shit Sherlock” moment to you, but to people like my Fox News watching extended family, this study is something that contradicts their current mental model of the situation, and something that I am glad I have in my quiver when they start talking about the subject to me.
I’m not sure if it was your intention or you didn’t read the second half of my comment but you essentially repeated the point I just made, therefore, yes I agree.
What’s this, a civil discussion on the internet? Well, I never… You’re both so wholesome, if I were still on Reddit and seeing this, you’d both get a badge each
Oh snap, I did somehow miss that. My bad.
We’ve been telling it to cis people for years but the refusal to listen to that was palpable.
Here’s a Sartre quote about bigotry/fascists that you may find useful:
“Never believe that [they] are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. [They] have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.”
I’m aware, I’m not talking about those extremists however. I’m talking about the people who are unsure and potential allies. Yes, they still exist in 2023. I convinced one in my family just this past month after being patient and explaining concepts and terms. That’s the scenario these studies can be very helpful.
The comment section over at the other site is pretty gross to be honest.
- People scoffing at the low N, as if this wasn’t just another in a long line of data points.
- People scoffing at the 41% non-respondant rate, as if a 59% response rate isn’t fantastic. Especially considering that some of the people being contacted had the procedure done over a decade ago.
- Misinterpreting the exclusion of discordant results as exclusion of regretful results.
- People suggesting selection bias, when the study attempted to contact literally every patient who had the procedure over a 30 year period, was over 18 and spoke English.
- People just generally humming-and-hawwing and pondering vast narratives about what might have occurred!
It’s literally just people finding ANY reason to doubt, and getting slammed with upvotes.
Another bit of evidence for the pretty significant existing pile of evidence!
JAMA Surgery - new band name, called it.
🤖 I’m a bot that provides automatic summaries for articles:
Click here to see the summary
The results were so clear, in fact, that the study authors were unable to perform the complex statistical analyses they had planned due to the striking uniformity in the survey responses.
In the meantime, while researchers collect more data, the AAP reaffirmed its support of gender-affirming care and highlighted that it “opposes any laws or regulations that discriminate against transgender and gender-diverse individuals, or that interfere in the doctor-patient relationship.”
Of the total 235 patients, none requested or underwent a reversal treatment, and about a quarter of responders and non-responders went on to have additional gender-affirming procedures after their chest reconstruction surgeries.
“This extremely low level of regret and dissatisfaction and lack of variance in scores impeded the ability to determine meaningful associations among these results, clinical outcomes, and demographic information,” Lane and co-authors wrote in the study.
“Based on our prior experience with this patient population, we expected people to be very satisfied with their decision to get surgery, but we were surprised to find how little these results varied,” Lane said.
Ian Nolan, Brielle Weinstein, and Loren Schechter also noted the “striking” results compared with the regret rates from other types of medical treatments, saying the finding highlights a “double standard.”
I’m glad Ars seems to have walked back its transphobia after the absolute shit-show that was its article about twitter screening a self identified fascist’s transphobic screed that somehow came down on the side of the fascist.
The median Satisfaction With Decision Scale score was 5.0 (IQR, 5.0-5.0) on a 5-point scale, with higher scores noting higher satisfaction.
The median Decision Regret Scale score was 0.0 (IQR, 0.0-0.0) on a 100-point scale, with lower scores noting lower levels of regret.
it’s a pretty drastic decision to make if you’re unsure, so these results seem pretty reasonable. Probably even more so for bottom surgery.
can someone with a subscription explain what validated instruments are being used? because being able to objectively certify regret would be quite the valuable tool. almost as valuable as not putting scientific knowledge behind a fucking paywall.
Main Outcomes and Measures Long-term patient-reported outcomes, including the Holmes-Rovner Satisfaction With Decision scale, the Decision Regret Scale, and demographic characteristics, were collected.
Holmes-Rovner Satisfaction With Decision scale table-only version
Decision Regret Scale**I’m only about 80% certain this is the scale used, will need to wait for access to the article to confirm
