Patient-reported satisfaction and health-related quality of life after chest masculinization in transgender men using the BODY-Q Chest module and the 15D instrument

Le résumé fourni par la source

Chest masculinization is the most common surgical intervention in transgender men. Studies indicate good patient-reported postoperative satisfaction, but only recently has a patient-reported outcome instrument, the BODY-Q Chest module, been developed and validated for this patient group. This study aimed to evaluate postoperative patient-reported satisfaction and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) using the BODY-Q Chest module and the 15D after surgical chest masculinization in transgender men. The data comprised all patients receiving chest masculinization from 2005 to 2018. The patients were invited by letter to complete the BODY-Q Chest module and the 15D questionnaire in May 2020. Of the 220 patients invited, 123 completed the survey, resulting in a response rate of 56%. The median chest and nipple scores were 76 and 68 out of 100, respectively. The number of secondary corrections was negatively associated with the chest score (p value < 0.001). The 15D index score was lower compared with the age-standardized male population (p value < 0.001), but similar to the age-standardized female population. Psychiatric comorbidity was associated with lower 15D index scores (p value < 0.001). There were no statistically significant differences between the BODY-Q Chest module scores or the 15D index score among the different surgical techniques. The postoperative satisfaction with chest masculinization was good and in line with previous literature. HRQoL resembles that of the reference population. The periareolar technique is not associated with better satisfaction despite causing less scar burden. The negative association between the chest score and number of secondary corrections is unsettling and requires further examination in a prospective setting.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.