Literature DB >> 23394414

Validation of genital appearance satisfaction scale and the cosmetic procedure screening scale for women seeking labiaplasty.

David Veale1, Ertimiss Eshkevari, Nell Ellison, Linda Cardozo, Dudley Robinson, Angelica Kavouni.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Existing outcome studies on women seeking labiaplasty have not used a validated scale that is specific for satisfaction with genital appearance. They have also not screened for the presence of body dysmorphic disorder (BDD). There are therefore two primary aims of this study (1) to validate the Genital Appearance Satisfaction (GAS) scale in women seeking labiaplasty and (2) to modify and validate a version of the Cosmetic Procedures Screening questionnaire (COPS-L), which has previously been used to screen for BDD.
METHOD: Two groups of women were recruited: a group desiring labiaplasty and a control group. All participants completed the GAS, the COPS-L and other general measures of mood, disgust sensitivity, sexual satisfaction and body image quality of life.
RESULTS: Both the GAS and COPS-L demonstrated good internal consistency, concurrent and convergent validity with measures of related constructs, and discriminated between women seeking labiaplasty and controls. Three factors were identified in the GAS but were not robust enough to recommend their use clinically as subscales. The COPS-L discriminated between women seeking labiaplasty with and without BDD. DISCUSSION: We recommend that both the GAS and the COPS-L be routinely used for audit and outcome monitoring of interventions for women distressed by the appearance or function of their genitalia. The GAS has an advantage in assessing additional functional symptoms in such women. The COPS-L may be helpful in identifying women with BDD.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23394414     DOI: 10.3109/0167482X.2012.756865

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol        ISSN: 0167-482X            Impact factor:   2.949


  7 in total

Review 1.  Labiaplasty: motivation, techniques, and ethics.

Authors:  Müjde Özer; Indiana Mortimore; Elise P Jansma; Margriet G Mullender
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2018-02-06       Impact factor: 14.432

2.  Psychosexual outcome after labiaplasty: a prospective case-comparison study.

Authors:  David Veale; Iona Naismith; Ertiniss Eshkevari; Nell Ellison; Ana Costa; Dudley Robinson; Lanka Abeywickrama; Angelica Kavouni; Linda Cardozo
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2014-01-22       Impact factor: 2.894

3.  Satisfaction Survey of Women After Cosmetic Genital Procedures: A Cross-Sectional Study From Saudi Arabia.

Authors:  Modhi M Al-Jumah; Shorug K Al-Wailiy; Ahmed Al-Badr
Journal:  Aesthet Surg J Open Forum       Date:  2020-11-10

4.  Cosmetic Procedure Screening Questionnaire (COPS): creation and validation of the Polish language version.

Authors:  Ida Yurtsever; Łukasz Matusiak; Marta Szepietowska; Ewa Wójcik; David Veale; Jacek C Szepietowski
Journal:  Postepy Dermatol Alergol       Date:  2020-07-14       Impact factor: 1.837

5.  Body dysmorphic disorder of female genitalia: a qualitative study of Swiss obstetrician-gynecologists' experiences and practices.

Authors:  Olenka Dworakowski; Marie Drüge; Michelle Schlunegger; Birgit Watzke
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2021-09-30       Impact factor: 2.344

6.  Spanish Translation, Transcultural Adaptation, Validation and Clinical Applicability of Female Genital-Self Image Scale (FGSIS).

Authors:  Alba Bartolomé; Cecilia Villalaín; Rocío Bermejo; Ana Belén Bolívar; Laura Pilar Castillo; Alberto Galindo; Álvaro Tejerizo
Journal:  Sex Med       Date:  2022-08-23       Impact factor: 2.523

Review 7.  The Safe Practice of Female Genital Plastic Surgery.

Authors:  Heather J Furnas; Francisco L Canales; Rachel A Pedreira; Carly Comer; Samuel J Lin; Paul E Banwell
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2021-07-06
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.