Terri L Woodard1, Michael P Diamond. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Wayne State University School of Medicine, 3750 Woodward Avenue, Detroit, MI 48201, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To review and describe physiologic measures of assessing sexual function in women. DESIGN: Literature review. SETTING: Studies that use instruments designed to measure female sexual function. PATIENT(S): Women participating in studies of female sexual function. INTERVENTION(S): Various instruments that measure physiologic features of female sexual function. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Appraisal of the various instruments, including their advantages and disadvantages. RESULT(S): Many unique physiologic methods of evaluating female sexual function have been developed during the past four decades. Each method has its benefits and limitations. CONCLUSION(S): Many physiologic methods exist, but most are not well-validated. In addition there has been an inability to correlate most physiologic measures with subjective measures of sexual arousal. Furthermore, given the complex nature of the sexual response in women, physiologic measures should be considered in context of other data, including the history, physical examination, and validated questionnaires. Nonetheless, the existence of appropriate physiologic measures is vital to our understanding of female sexual function and dysfunction.
OBJECTIVE: To review and describe physiologic measures of assessing sexual function in women. DESIGN: Literature review. SETTING: Studies that use instruments designed to measure female sexual function. PATIENT(S): Women participating in studies of female sexual function. INTERVENTION(S): Various instruments that measure physiologic features of female sexual function. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Appraisal of the various instruments, including their advantages and disadvantages. RESULT(S): Many unique physiologic methods of evaluating female sexual function have been developed during the past four decades. Each method has its benefits and limitations. CONCLUSION(S): Many physiologic methods exist, but most are not well-validated. In addition there has been an inability to correlate most physiologic measures with subjective measures of sexual arousal. Furthermore, given the complex nature of the sexual response in women, physiologic measures should be considered in context of other data, including the history, physical examination, and validated questionnaires. Nonetheless, the existence of appropriate physiologic measures is vital to our understanding of female sexual function and dysfunction.
Authors: S Stoléru; M C Grégoire; D Gérard; J Decety; E Lafarge; L Cinotti; F Lavenne; D Le Bars; E Vernet-Maury; H Rada; C Collet; B Mazoyer; M G Forest; F Magnin; A Spira; D Comar Journal: Arch Sex Behav Date: 1999-02
Authors: Kenneth R Maravilla; Yunyu Cao; Julia R Heiman; Claire Yang; Patricia A Garland; Barry T Peterson; Wayne O Carter Journal: J Urol Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Carolin Klein; Matthew N Hill; Sabrina C H Chang; Cecilia J Hillard; Boris B Gorzalka Journal: J Sex Med Date: 2012-03-29 Impact factor: 3.802