AIMS: To investigate domains of sexual function in healthy women attending a gynecological office for routine annual check-up using the Italian translation of the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) according to age, reproductive status and hormonal treatments; and to confirm the usefulness of the FSFI in detecting relevant clinical entities. METHODS: Of 720 women (age range 18-65 years), 564 (78%) filled in a short anamnestic questionnaire and the FSFI assessing desire, arousal, lubrication, orgasm, satisfaction and pain. A semi-structured DSM-IV-TR clinical interview was administered to a convenience sample of women selected according to the quartile distribution of the median full scale FSFI score. Analysis of data was performed by frequency tables and non-parametric statistics. RESULTS: The median full scale score of FSFI in our study population was 27.6 (lower quartile: 18.7, upper quartile: 30.9) and the percentage of women under the lower quartile of the distribution was 24.4%. Sexual function decreased progressively with age, being significantly lower after 30 years and after 60 years (chi(2) = 52.6; p = 0.0001). Menopausal women had significantly lower median FSFI full scale score compared with fertile women and women who used oral contraception (OC) (p < 0.0001 for both), while users of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) displayed better overall sexual function than untreated postmenopausal women (p < 0.005). A positive diagnosis of female sexual dysfunction (FSD) was evident only in young women scoring under the lower quartile of the distribution (cut-off score: 23.4 for women not taking OC and 20.8 for OC users), while older women were dysfunctional also above the lower quartile of the distribution (cut-off score: 14.1 for menopause, 18.5 for HRT) of the FSFI full scale score. CONCLUSIONS: The FSFI is a powerful screening tool for FSD, especially in young fertile women, and may be used effectively in routine gynecological practice.
AIMS: To investigate domains of sexual function in healthy women attending a gynecological office for routine annual check-up using the Italian translation of the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) according to age, reproductive status and hormonal treatments; and to confirm the usefulness of the FSFI in detecting relevant clinical entities. METHODS: Of 720 women (age range 18-65 years), 564 (78%) filled in a short anamnestic questionnaire and the FSFI assessing desire, arousal, lubrication, orgasm, satisfaction and pain. A semi-structured DSM-IV-TR clinical interview was administered to a convenience sample of women selected according to the quartile distribution of the median full scale FSFI score. Analysis of data was performed by frequency tables and non-parametric statistics. RESULTS: The median full scale score of FSFI in our study population was 27.6 (lower quartile: 18.7, upper quartile: 30.9) and the percentage of women under the lower quartile of the distribution was 24.4%. Sexual function decreased progressively with age, being significantly lower after 30 years and after 60 years (chi(2) = 52.6; p = 0.0001). Menopausal women had significantly lower median FSFI full scale score compared with fertile women and women who used oral contraception (OC) (p < 0.0001 for both), while users of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) displayed better overall sexual function than untreated postmenopausal women (p < 0.005). A positive diagnosis of female sexual dysfunction (FSD) was evident only in young women scoring under the lower quartile of the distribution (cut-off score: 23.4 for women not taking OC and 20.8 for OC users), while older women were dysfunctional also above the lower quartile of the distribution (cut-off score: 14.1 for menopause, 18.5 for HRT) of the FSFI full scale score. CONCLUSIONS: The FSFI is a powerful screening tool for FSD, especially in young fertile women, and may be used effectively in routine gynecological practice.
Authors: E Maseroli; E Fanni; M Fambrini; B Ragghianti; E Limoncin; E Mannucci; M Maggi; L Vignozzi Journal: J Endocrinol Invest Date: 2015-09-03 Impact factor: 4.256
Authors: G Ciocca; E Limoncin; S Di Tommaso; D Mollaioli; G L Gravina; A Marcozzi; A Tullii; E Carosa; S Di Sante; D Gianfrilli; A Lenzi; E A Jannini Journal: Int J Impot Res Date: 2014-08-14 Impact factor: 2.896