INTRODUCTION: Combining female sexual desire and arousal disorders is proposed for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). Brotto et al. challenged our findings that the proposed criteria could potentially exclude from diagnosis or treatment a large number of women with distressing loss of function or in sexual desire, because (i) our samples were insufficiently severe; (ii) we sought to retain the current diagnostic criteria, whereas they contend that "the bar should be raised"; and (iii) the current sexual function diagnostic criteria are unreliable. AIM: Here we provide additional data to support our view suggesting that the proposed criteria would potentially exclude large numbers of women from diagnosis or treatment if they have moderate-to-marked (rather than severe) hypoactive sexual desire disorder (HSDD), or HSDD with incomplete loss of receptivity. METHODS: In nontreatment validation studies of 481 women in North America and Europe, 231 women diagnosed with HSDD only were compared to women with no female sexual desire. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinicians experienced in sexual medicine determined the severity of HSDD using the standard Clinical Global Impression of Severity. Rating scale data were also used, including the clinician-rated Sexual Desire and Interest Inventory-Female and the self-rated Female Sexual Function Index, Changes in Sexual Functioning Questionnaire, Female Sexual Distress Scale, and an e-Diary about desire during sexual events. RESULTS: The severity of the HSDD was rated by clinicians as generally moderate-to-marked, not mild. The women with HSDD scored as manifestly sexually dysfunctional and significantly sexually distressed, and reported markedly fewer satisfying sexual events compared to age-matched, non-dysfunctional controls, even for those with moderate or milder degrees of severity, providing compelling evidence that our sample of women with HSDD had clinically disordered sexual function. Yet the proposed criteria would apparently allow diagnosis (and therefore treatment) of only severe desire dysfunction. CONCLUSION: It would be counterproductive to combine the two disorders, to make individual criteria for the disorders more stringent or to require more such criteria for a diagnosis because such disorders tend to be distinct in presentation, in treatability with currently available therapies, and in logical approaches to be tested to improve therapy.
INTRODUCTION: Combining female sexual desire and arousal disorders is proposed for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). Brotto et al. challenged our findings that the proposed criteria could potentially exclude from diagnosis or treatment a large number of women with distressing loss of function or in sexual desire, because (i) our samples were insufficiently severe; (ii) we sought to retain the current diagnostic criteria, whereas they contend that "the bar should be raised"; and (iii) the current sexual function diagnostic criteria are unreliable. AIM: Here we provide additional data to support our view suggesting that the proposed criteria would potentially exclude large numbers of women from diagnosis or treatment if they have moderate-to-marked (rather than severe) hypoactive sexual desire disorder (HSDD), or HSDD with incomplete loss of receptivity. METHODS: In nontreatment validation studies of 481 women in North America and Europe, 231 women diagnosed with HSDD only were compared to women with no female sexual desire. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinicians experienced in sexual medicine determined the severity of HSDD using the standard Clinical Global Impression of Severity. Rating scale data were also used, including the clinician-rated Sexual Desire and Interest Inventory-Female and the self-rated Female Sexual Function Index, Changes in Sexual Functioning Questionnaire, Female Sexual Distress Scale, and an e-Diary about desire during sexual events. RESULTS: The severity of the HSDD was rated by clinicians as generally moderate-to-marked, not mild. The women with HSDD scored as manifestly sexually dysfunctional and significantly sexually distressed, and reported markedly fewer satisfying sexual events compared to age-matched, non-dysfunctional controls, even for those with moderate or milder degrees of severity, providing compelling evidence that our sample of women with HSDD had clinically disordered sexual function. Yet the proposed criteria would apparently allow diagnosis (and therefore treatment) of only severe desire dysfunction. CONCLUSION: It would be counterproductive to combine the two disorders, to make individual criteria for the disorders more stringent or to require more such criteria for a diagnosis because such disorders tend to be distinct in presentation, in treatability with currently available therapies, and in logical approaches to be tested to improve therapy.
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