Search

Abstract Background While there have been calls over the last 15 years for the inclusion of training in sex and gender-based medicine in medical school curricula and to sustain such improvements through a more gender responsive health system, little progress has been made. A related objective of the Australian National Men’s Health Strategy (2020-30) is to improve practitioner core learning competencies in men’s health as a critical step to reducing the burden of disease in men and disparities between men in health care access and outcomes. The aim of this study was therefore to obtain Australian medical student perspectives on the extent to which men’s health and sex and gender-based medicine education is delivered in their curricula, their preparedness for engaging with men in clinical practice, and the men’s health content they would have found useful during their training. Methods Eighty-three students (48% male) from 17 accredited medical schools, and in at least their fourth year of training, completed an online survey. The survey was co-designed by a multidisciplinary team of men’s health researchers and clinicians, alongside a student representative. A mix of quantitative and qualitative survey items inquired about students’ preparedness for men’s health clinical practice, and coverage of men’s health and sex- and gender-based medicine in their curricula. Results Most students reported minimal to no men’s health coverage in their medical school education (65%). While few were offered optional men’s health units (10.5%), the majority would have liked more formal training on the topic (78%). Accompanying qualitative findings substantiated a lack of preparedness among medical students to engage male patients, likely stemming from minimal coverage of men’s health in their medical education. Conclusions Australian medical students may feel underprepared for contemporary men’s health clinical practice, as well as, albeit to a lesser extent, women’s health clinical practice. There is a clear need and desire amongst medical students to enhance curricula with sex and gender-based medicine training.

OBJECTIVES Developing the capacity of the health system, and the practitioners within it, to provide quality gender responsive care to men and boys remains critical to advancing men's health, and reducing health inequities amongst men. The aim for this study was to undertake a formative evaluation of Australian university health curricula for men's health content and scope the opportunities for future enhancement. METHODS A two-stage evaluation first involved a review of online course information for a sample of medicine ( n = 10), nursing ( n = 10), pharmacy ( n = 10), clinical psychology ( n = 10), social work ( n = 12) and public health ( n = 15) university curricula for men's health and gender content and opportunities for curricula enhancement. Secondly, university staff completed a survey on the coverage of men's health in their course(s), and receptivity, barriers and facilitators to curricula enhancement. RESULTS The curricula review found no dedicated men's health courses, and men's health was referenced in the information for 10 of 1246 courses (0.8%) in 8 of 67 curricula. Gender was rarely referenced in course information, particularly for the disciplines of medicine, nursing, pharmacy, and clinical psychology. There was an average of 16 enhancement opportunities per curricula with 40% relating to communicating and engaging with men within healthcare. Seventy staff from 25 universities and all target disciplines validated the curricula review findings of limited dedicated men's health content. Eighty-three percent were receptive to curricula enhancement, facilitated by content integration into existing courses. CONCLUSION This review provides clear evidence that there are gaps, opportunities, and educator receptiveness for improving and implementing content regarding men's health education and gender responsive care in Australian university health curricula.

Gender-responsive healthcare is critical to advancing men’s health given that masculinities intersect with other social determinants to impact help-seeking, engagement with primary healthcare, and patient outcomes. A scoping review was undertaken with the aim to synthesize gender-responsive approaches used by healthcare providers (HCPs) to engage men with primary healthcare. MEDLINE, PubMed, CINAHL, and PsycINFO databases were searched for articles published between 2000 and February 2024. Titles and abstracts for 15,659 citations were reviewed, and 97 articles met the inclusion criteria. Data were extracted and analyzed thematically. Thirty-three approaches were synthesized from across counseling/psychology, general practice, social work, nursing, psychiatry, pharmacy, and unspecified primary healthcare settings. These were organized into three interrelated themes: (a) tailoring communication to reach men; (b) purposefully structuring treatment to meet men’s health needs, and (c) centering the therapeutic alliance to retain men in care. Strength-based and asset-building approaches focused on reading and responding to a diversity of masculinities was reinforced across the three findings. While these approaches are recommended for the judicious integration into health practitioner education and practice, this review highlighted that the evidence remains underdeveloped, particularly for men who experience health inequities. Critical priorities for further research include intersectional considerations and operationalizing gender-responsive healthcare approaches for men and its outcomes, particularly at first point-of-contact encounters.

Abstract Background Low back pain causes more global disability than any other condition. Once the acute pain becomes chronic, about two-thirds of sufferers will not fully recover after 1–2 years. There is a paucity of effective treatments for non-specific, chronic low back pain. It has been noted that low back pain is associated with changes in the connective tissue in the affected area, and a very low-impact treatment, Esoteric Connective Tissue Therapy (ECTT), has been developed to restore flexibility in connective tissue. ECTT uses patterns of very small, circular movements, to the legs, arms, spine, sacrum and head, which anecdotally are effective in pain relief. In an unpublished single-arm phase I/II trial with chronic pain patients, ECTT showed a 56% reduction in pain after five treatments and 45% and 54% improvements at 6 months and 7–9 years of follow-up respectively. Methods The aim of this randomised controlled trial is to compare ECTT with physiotherapy for reducing pain and improving physical function and physical and mental well-being in patients with chronic low back pain. The trial will be held at two hospitals in Vietnam. One hundred participants with chronic low back pain greater than or equal to 40/100 on the visual analogue scale will be recruited and randomised to either ECTT or physiotherapy. Four weekly treatments will be provided by two experienced ECTT practitioners (Treatment Group, 40 minutes each) and hospital-employed physiotherapy nurses (Control Group, 50 minutes). The primary outcomes will be changes in pain, physical function per the Quebec Pain Functionality Questionnaire and physical and mental well-being recorded by the Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), with mixed modelling used as the primary statistical tool because the data are longitudinal. Initial follow-up will be at either 4 or 8 months, with a second follow-up after 12 months. Discussion The trial design has important strengths, because it is to be conducted in hospitals under medical supervision, because ECTT is to be compared with a standard therapy and because the assessor and analyst are to be blinded. The findings from this trial will provide evidence of the efficacy of ECTT for chronic low back pain compared with standard physiotherapy treatment. Trial registration Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12616001196437 . Registered on 30 August 2016.

This article has been retracted. Please see the Retraction Notice for more detail: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-021-05154-3.