Telehealth Versus In-Person Injection Instruction for Adolescents and Young Adults Initiating Gender-Affirming Testosterone Therapy.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical acceptability of testosterone levels, time to treatment, and postinstruction questions/problems between in-person and telehealth injection teaching for adolescents and young adults (AYA) initiating gender-affirming testosterone therapy. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using electronic medical record data from a large pediatric gender health clinic. Patients who received subcutaneous testosterone prescriptions between March 15, 2018, and March 14, 2022, were included. The study compared patients receiving in-person versus telehealth injection teaching. Data were collected on demographics, testosterone levels at 3 and 6 months, time from prescription to treatment, and post-instruction contacts. Statistical analyses included Results: The study included 278 patients, with 136 (48.9%) receiving in-person teaching and 142 (51.1%) receiving telehealth teaching. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between groups. Clinical effectiveness, indicated by testosterone levels at 3 and 6 months, revealed no significant difference between instruction methods ( Conclusion: Telehealth instruction for testosterone injection is as effective as in-person teaching methods for AYA initiating gender-affirming care. The findings support the continued use of telehealth to enhance access to gender-affirming care, particularly in light of its clinical efficacy and patient acceptability.