INTRODUCTION: Current studies indicate that women with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) have a high prevalence of sexual disorders although data on the prevalence of sexual dysfunction are limited when sexual distress is included. AIM: The frequency and the possible correlates of distressful sexual disorders in a highly selected group of type 1 diabetic women. METHODS: The sexual function, sexual distress, and general health status were assessed in 44 premenopausal women with uncomplicated T1DM and 47 healthy controls, using the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI), the Female Sexual Distress Scale (FSDS), and the General Health Questionnaire-28 (GHQ-28). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The impact of sexual distress on the frequency of female sexual dysfunction (FSD). RESULTS: The frequency of sexual disorders according to the FSFI was significantly higher in diabetic compared to control women (25% vs. 8.5%, respectively, P < 0.05). Diabetic women had significantly lower median (first to third quartile) total FSFI score compared to control group (30.55 [26.08-33.08] vs. 33.50 [30.70-34.30], P = 0.001). Desire, arousal, and satisfaction were the sexual domains significantly affected in the diabetic group. Diabetic women had significantly higher median (first to third quartile) FSDS score compared to control group (6.5 [2.3-15.8] vs. 4.0 [1.0-10.5] P = 0.043). FSD (combined pathological FSFI and FSDS scores) was present in higher proportion of diabetic women (15.9%) compared to controls (2.1%) (P = 0.020). GHQ-28 score was comparable between the groups. However, in the diabetic group, FSD was related with anxiety, depression, and low educational level. Diabetes-related factors were not associated with FSD. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-menopausal women with uncomplicated T1DM have significantly higher frequency of FSD compared to healthy controls, when the criterion of sexual distress is included. Psychosomatic and contextual factors implicated in sexual distress are correlates of FSD.
INTRODUCTION: Current studies indicate that women with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) have a high prevalence of sexual disorders although data on the prevalence of sexual dysfunction are limited when sexual distress is included. AIM: The frequency and the possible correlates of distressful sexual disorders in a highly selected group of type 1 diabeticwomen. METHODS: The sexual function, sexual distress, and general health status were assessed in 44 premenopausal women with uncomplicated T1DM and 47 healthy controls, using the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI), the Female Sexual Distress Scale (FSDS), and the General Health Questionnaire-28 (GHQ-28). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The impact of sexual distress on the frequency of female sexual dysfunction (FSD). RESULTS: The frequency of sexual disorders according to the FSFI was significantly higher in diabetic compared to control women (25% vs. 8.5%, respectively, P < 0.05). Diabeticwomen had significantly lower median (first to third quartile) total FSFI score compared to control group (30.55 [26.08-33.08] vs. 33.50 [30.70-34.30], P = 0.001). Desire, arousal, and satisfaction were the sexual domains significantly affected in the diabetic group. Diabeticwomen had significantly higher median (first to third quartile) FSDS score compared to control group (6.5 [2.3-15.8] vs. 4.0 [1.0-10.5] P = 0.043). FSD (combined pathological FSFI and FSDS scores) was present in higher proportion of diabeticwomen (15.9%) compared to controls (2.1%) (P = 0.020). GHQ-28 score was comparable between the groups. However, in the diabetic group, FSD was related with anxiety, depression, and low educational level. Diabetes-related factors were not associated with FSD. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-menopausal women with uncomplicated T1DM have significantly higher frequency of FSD compared to healthy controls, when the criterion of sexual distress is included. Psychosomatic and contextual factors implicated in sexual distress are correlates of FSD.
Authors: M I Maiorino; G Bellastella; F Castaldo; M Petrizzo; D Giugliano; K Esposito Journal: J Endocrinol Invest Date: 2016-09-09 Impact factor: 4.256
Authors: Ewelina Bak; Czeslaw Marcisz; Sylwia Krzeminska; Dorota Dobrzyn-Matusiak; Agnieszka Foltyn; Agnieszka Drosdzol-Cop Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2018-05-11 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Hunter Wessells; Barbara H Braffett; Sarah K Holt; Alan M Jacobson; John W Kusek; Catherine Cowie; Rodney L Dunn; Aruna V Sarma Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2018-08-13 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Ewelina Bąk; Agnieszka Młynarska; Danuta Sternal; Monika Kadłubowska; Ewa Marcisz-Dyla; Czesław Marcisz Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-03-04 Impact factor: 3.390