BackgroundA growing body of research continues to elucidate health inequities experienced by transgender individuals and further underscores the need for medical providers to be appropriately trained to deliver care to this population. Medical education in transgender health can empower physicians to identify and change the systemic barriers to care that cause transgender health inequities as well as improve knowledge about transgender-specific care.MethodsWe conducted structured searches of five databases to identify literature related to medical education and transgender health. Of the 1272 papers reviewed, 119 papers were deemed relevant to predefined criteria, medical education, and transgender health topics. Citation tracking was conducted on the 119 papers using Scopus to identify an additional 12 relevant citations (a total of 131 papers). Searches were completed on October 15, 2017 and updated on December 11, 2017.ResultsTransgender health has yet to gain widespread curricular exposure, but efforts toward incorporating transgender health into both undergraduate and graduate medical educations are nascent. There is no consensus on the exact educational interventions that should be used to address transgender health. Barriers to increased transgender health exposure include limited curricular time, lack of topic-specific competency among faculty, and underwhelming institutional support. All published interventions proved effective in improving attitudes, knowledge, and/or skills necessary to achieve clinical competency with transgender patients.ConclusionTransgender populations experience health inequities in part due to the exclusion of transgender-specific health needs from medical school and residency curricula. Currently, transgender medical education is largely composed of one-time attitude and awareness-based interventions that show significant short-term improvements but suffer methodologically. Consensus in the existing literature supports educational efforts to shift toward pedagogical interventions that are longitudinally integrated and clinical skills based, and we include a series of recommendations to affirm and guide such an undertaking.

Recent reports estimate that 0.6% of adults in the United States, or approximately 1.4 million persons, identify as transgender. Despite gains in rights and media attention, the reality is that transgender persons experience health disparities, and a dearth of research and evidence-based guidelines remains regarding their specific health needs. The lack of research to characterize cardiovascular disease (CVD) and CVD risk factors in transgender populations receiving cross-sex hormone therapy (CSHT) limits appropriate primary and specialty care. As with hormone therapy in cisgender persons (that is, those whose sex assigned at birth aligns with their gender identity), existing research in transgender populations suggests that CVD risk factors are altered by CSHT. Currently, systemic hormone replacement for cisgender adults requires a nuanced discussion based on baseline risk factors and age of administration of exogenous hormones because of concern regarding an increased risk for myocardial infarction and stroke. For transgender adults, CSHT has been associated with the potential for worsening CVD risk factors (such as blood pressure elevation, insulin resistance, and lipid derangements), although these changes have not been associated with increases in morbidity or mortality in transgender men receiving CSHT. For transgender women, CSHT has known thromboembolic risk, and lower-dose transdermal estrogen formulations are preferred over high-dose oral formulations. In addition, many studies of transgender adults focus predominantly on younger persons, limiting the generalizability of CSHT in older transgender adults. The lack of randomized controlled trials comparing various routes and formulations of CSHT, as well as the paucity of prospective cohort studies, limits knowledge of any associations between CSHT and CVD.

There is mounting evidence that lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer or questioning (LGBTQ) adults experience disparities across several cardiovascular risk factors compared with their cisgender heterosexual peers. These disparities are posited to be driven primarily by exposure to psychosocial stressors across the life span. This American Heart Association scientific statement reviews the extant literature on the cardiovascular health of LGBTQ adults. Informed by the minority stress and social ecological models, the objectives of this statement were (1) to present a conceptual model to elucidate potential mechanisms underlying cardiovascular health disparities in LGBTQ adults, (2) to identify research gaps, and (3) to provide suggestions for improving cardiovascular research and care of LGBTQ people. Despite the identified methodological limitations, there is evidence that LGBTQ adults (particularly lesbian, bisexual, and transgender women) experience disparities across several cardiovascular health metrics. These disparities vary by race, sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity. Future research in this area should incorporate longitudinal designs, elucidate physiological mechanisms, assess social and clinical determinants of cardiovascular health, and identify potential targets for behavioral interventions. There is a need to develop and test interventions that address multilevel stressors that affect the cardiovascular health of LGBTQ adults. Content on LGBTQ health should be integrated into health professions curricula and continuing education for practicing clinicians. Advancing the cardiovascular health of LGBTQ adults requires a multifaceted approach that includes stakeholders from multiple sectors to integrate best practices into health promotion and cardiovascular care of this population.

There is growing evidence that people who are transgender and gender diverse (TGD) are impacted by disparities across a variety of cardiovascular risk factors compared with their peers who are cisgender. Prior literature has characterized disparities in cardiovascular morbidity and mortality as a result of a higher prevalence of health risk behaviors. Mounting research has revealed that cardiovascular risk factors at the individual level likely do not fully account for increased risk in cardiovascular health disparities among people who are TGD. Excess cardiovascular morbidity and mortality is hypothesized to be driven in part by psychosocial stressors across the lifespan at multiple levels, including structural violence (eg, discrimination, affordable housing, access to health care). This American Heart Association scientific statement reviews the existing literature on the cardiovascular health of people who are TGD. When applicable, the effects of gender-affirming hormone use on individual cardiovascular risk factors are also reviewed. Informed by a conceptual model building on minority stress theory, this statement identifies research gaps and provides suggestions for improving cardiovascular research and clinical care for people who are TGD, including the role of resilience-promoting factors. Advancing the cardiovascular health of people who are TGD requires a multifaceted approach that integrates best practices into research, health promotion, and cardiovascular care for this understudied population.