OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the sexual function of women with premature ovarian failure (POF). METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed to evaluate 58 women with a diagnosis of POF compared with a control group composed of 58 women of reproductive age with normal ovarian function, paired for age (±2 y). Sexual function was evaluated in the two groups using the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI). RESULTS: The mean ± SD age of the women in the POF and control groups was 39.4 ± 6.5 and 39.0 ± 6.8 years, respectively. Mean ± SD FSFI score was 24.0 ± 6.0 and 27.3 ± 4.8 in the POF and control groups, respectively. The prevalence of sexual dysfunction (total FSFI score ≤ 26.55) in the POF group was 62.1% (n = 36) compared with 37.8% (n = 22) in the control group (P = 0.0093). In the analysis of domains, the only domain in which no statistically significant difference was found between the two groups was desire. For the domains of arousal, lubrication, orgasm, satisfaction, and pain, scores were significantly lower, hence poorer, in the group of women with POF compared with the control group. Belonging to the POF group increased a woman's likelihood of having sexual dysfunction by 2.8-fold (OR = 2.78, IC 1.29 to 5.98, P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Women with POF had a higher prevalence of sexual dysfunction compared with women with normal gonadal function and more difficulties in relation to satisfaction, lubrication, orgasm, pain, and arousal; however, there were no differences between the two groups with respect to desire.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the sexual function of women with premature ovarian failure (POF). METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed to evaluate 58 women with a diagnosis of POF compared with a control group composed of 58 women of reproductive age with normal ovarian function, paired for age (±2 y). Sexual function was evaluated in the two groups using the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI). RESULTS: The mean ± SD age of the women in the POF and control groups was 39.4 ± 6.5 and 39.0 ± 6.8 years, respectively. Mean ± SD FSFI score was 24.0 ± 6.0 and 27.3 ± 4.8 in the POF and control groups, respectively. The prevalence of sexual dysfunction (total FSFI score ≤ 26.55) in the POF group was 62.1% (n = 36) compared with 37.8% (n = 22) in the control group (P = 0.0093). In the analysis of domains, the only domain in which no statistically significant difference was found between the two groups was desire. For the domains of arousal, lubrication, orgasm, satisfaction, and pain, scores were significantly lower, hence poorer, in the group of women with POF compared with the control group. Belonging to the POF group increased a woman's likelihood of having sexual dysfunction by 2.8-fold (OR = 2.78, IC 1.29 to 5.98, P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS:Women with POF had a higher prevalence of sexual dysfunction compared with women with normal gonadal function and more difficulties in relation to satisfaction, lubrication, orgasm, pain, and arousal; however, there were no differences between the two groups with respect to desire.
Authors: Marlise N Gunning; Cindy Meun; Bas B van Rijn; Nadine M P Daan; Jeanine E Roeters van Lennep; Yolande Appelman; Eric Boersma; Leonard Hofstra; Clemens G K M Fauser; Oscar L Rueda-Ochoa; Mohammad A Ikram; Maryam Kavousi; Cornelis B Lambalk; Marinus J C Eijkemans; Joop S E Laven; Bart C J M Fauser Journal: PLoS One Date: 2020-03-05 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Lara Terra; Maartje J Hooning; Bernadette A M Heemskerk-Gerritsen; Marc van Beurden; Jeanine E Roeters van Lennep; Helena C van Doorn; Joanne A de Hullu; Constantijne Mom; Eleonora B L van Dorst; Marian J E Mourits; Brigitte F M Slangen; Katja N Gaarenstroom; M Carola Zillikens; Tim Leiner; Lizet van der Kolk; Margriet Collee; Marijke Wevers; Margreet G E M Ausems; Klaartje van Engelen; Lieke Pv Berger; Christi J van Asperen; Encarna B Gomez-Garcia; Irma van de Beek; Matti A Rookus; Michael Hauptmann; Eveline M Bleiker; Sanne B Schagen; Neil K Aaronson; Angela H E M Maas; Flora E van Leeuwen Journal: JMIR Res Protoc Date: 2021-01-22
Authors: A Podfigurna-Stopa; A Czyzyk; M Grymowicz; R Smolarczyk; K Katulski; K Czajkowski; B Meczekalski Journal: J Endocrinol Invest Date: 2016-04-18 Impact factor: 4.256