BackgroundSexual orientation and gender identity are social determinants of health for people identifying as lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT), and health disparities among sexual and gender minority populations are increasingly well understood. Although the South African constitution guarantees sexual and gender minority people the right to non-discrimination and the right to access to healthcare, homo- and transphobia in society abound. Little is known about LGBT people’s healthcare experiences in South Africa, but anecdotal evidence suggests significant barriers to accessing care. Using the framework of the UN International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights General Comment 14, this study analyses the experiences of LGBT health service users using South African public sector healthcare, including access to HIV counselling, testing and treatment.MethodsA qualitative study comprised of 16 semi-structured interviews and two focus group discussions with LGBT health service users, and 14 individual interviews with representatives of LGBT organisations. Data were thematically analysed within the framework of the UN International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights General Comment 14, focusing on availability, accessibility, acceptability and quality of care.ResultsAll interviewees reported experiences of discrimination by healthcare providers based on their sexual orientation and/or gender identity. Participants recounted violations of all four elements of the UN General Comment 14: 1) Availability: Lack of public health facilities and services, both for general and LGBT-specific concerns; 2) Accessibility: Healthcare providers' refusal to provide care to LGBT patients; 3) Acceptability: Articulation of moral judgment and disapproval of LGBT patients’ identity, and forced subjection of patients to religious practices; 4) Quality: Lack of knowledge about LGBT identities and health needs, leading to poor-quality care. Participants had delayed or avoided seeking healthcare in the past, and none had sought out accountability or complaint mechanisms within the health system.ConclusionSexual orientation and gender identity are important categories of analysis for health equity, and lead to disparities in all four dimensions of healthcare access as defined by General Comment 14. Discriminatory and prejudicial attitudes by healthcare providers, combined with a lack of competency and knowledge are key reasons for these disparities in South Africa.

BackgroundPeople who identity as lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) have specific health needs. Sexual orientation and gender identity are social determinants of health, as homophobia and heteronormativity persist as prejudices in society. LGBT patients often experience discrimination and prejudice in health care settings. While recent South African policies recognise the need for providing LGBT specific health care, no curricula for teaching about LGBT health related issues exist in South African health sciences faculties. This study aimed to determine the extent to which LGBT health related content is taught in the University of Cape Town’s medical curriculum.MethodsA curriculum mapping exercise was conducted through an online survey of all academic staff at the UCT health sciences faculty, determining LGBT health related content, pedagogical methodology and assessment.Results127 academics, across 31 divisions and research units in the Faculty of Health Sciences, responded to the survey, of which 93 completed the questionnaire. Ten taught some content related to LGBT health in the MBChB curriculum. No LGBT health related content was taught in the allied health sciences curricula. The MBChB curriculum provided no opportunity for students to challenge their own attitudes towards LGBT patients, and key LGBT health topics such as safer sex, mental health, substance abuse and adolescent health were not addressed.ConclusionAt present, UCTs health sciences curricula do not adequately address LGBT specific health issues. Where LGBT health related content is taught in the MBChB curriculum, it is largely discretionary, unsystematic and not incorporated into the overarching structure. Coordinated initiatives to integrate LGBT health related content into all health sciences curricula should be supported, and follow an approach that challenges students to develop professional attitudes and behaviour concerning care for patients from LGBT backgrounds, as well as providing them with specific LGBT health knowledge. Educating health professions students on the health needs of LGBT people is essential to improving this population’s health by providing competent and non-judgmental care.

Background: Every person who seeks health care should be affirmed, respected, understood, and not judged. However, trans and gender diverse people have experienced significant marginalization and discrimination in health care settings. Health professionals are generally not adequately prepared by current curricula to provide appropriate healthcare to trans and gender diverse people. This strongly implies that health care students would benefit from curricula which facilitate learning about gender-affirming health care. Main body: Trans and gender diverse people have been pathologized by the medical profession, through classifications of mental illness in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and International Classification of Disease (ICD). Although this is changing in the new ICD-11, tension remains between depathologization discourses and access to gender-affirming health care. Trans and gender diverse people experience significant health disparities and an increased burden of disease, specifically in the areas of mental health, Human Immunodeficiency Virus, violence and victimisation. Many of these health disparities originate from discrimination and systemic biases that decrease access to care, as well as from health professional ignorance. This paper will outline gaps in health science curricula that have been described in different contexts, and specific educational interventions that have attempted to improve awareness, knowledge and skills related to genderaffirming health care. The education of primary care providers is critical, as in much of the world, specialist services for gender-affirming health care are not widely available. The ethics of the gatekeeping model, where service providers decide who can access care, will be discussed and contrasted with the informed-consent model that upholds autonomy by empowering patients to make their own health care decisions. Conclusion: There is an ethical imperative for health professionals to reduce health care disparities of trans and gender diverse people and practice within the health care values of social justice and cultural humility. As health science educators, we have an ethical duty to include gender-affirming health in health science curricula in order to prevent harm to the trans and gender diverse patients that our students will provide care for in the future.

No abstract

This study aims to compare the use and cost of objective and subjective measures of adherence to pediatric antiretroviral treatment in a primary care facility in South Africa. In a 1-month longitudinal study of 53 caregiver-child dyads, pharmacy refill (PR), measurement of returned syrups (RS), caregiver self-report (3DR) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) were compared to Medication Event Monitoring System (MEMS). Adherence was 100% for both VAS and 3DR; by PR and RS 100% and 103%, respectively. MEMS showed that 92% of prescribed doses were administered, but only 66% of these within the correct 12-hourly interval. None of the four measures correlated significantly with MEMS. MEMS data suggest that timing of doses is often more deviant from prescribed than expected and should be better addressed when monitoring adherence. Of all, MEMS was by far the most expensive measure. Alternative, cheaper electronic devices need to be more accessible in resource-limited settings.