PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to characterize patients seeking treatment at a Female Sexual Medicine and Women's Health Program and examine their sexual/vaginal health issues. METHODS: Data from clinical assessment forms were extracted from 509 women referred to the Female Sexual Medicine and Women's Health Program during/after cancer treatment. The form consists of a Vaginal Assessment Scale (VAS), vaginal health items, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) (Sexual Activity Questionnaire [SAQ], Sexual Self-Schema Scale [SSS], Female Sexual Function Index [FSFI]), and exploratory items. RESULTS: Of 509 patients, 493 (97 %) completed PROs; 253 (50 %) received a pelvic examination. The majority had a history of breast (n = 260, 51 %), gynecologic (n = 184, 36 %), or colorectal/anal (n = 35, 7 %) cancer. Mean age was 51.2 years; 313 (62 %) were married/partnered. Approximately two thirds had elevated vaginal pH scores (5-6.5 [35 %] or 6.5+ [33 %]) and minimal (62 %) or no (5 %) vaginal moisture. Eighty-seven patients (44 %) experienced pain during their exam (23 % mild, 11 % moderate, 1.5 % severe, and 8.5 % not indicated). Fifty-three percent engaged in sexual activity with a partner; only 43 % felt confident about future sexual activity. Ninety-three percent were somewhat to very concerned/worried about sexual function/vaginal health. Approximately half had moderate/severe dryness (n = 133, 51 %) and dyspareunia (n = 120, 46 %). The mean SSS score was 60.7, indicating a slightly positive sexual self-view. However, 93.5 % (n = 429) had an FSFI score <26.55, suggesting sexual dysfunction. CONCLUSIONS: At initial consult, women reported vaginal dryness, pain, and sexual dysfunction. For many women, pelvic exams showed elevated vaginal pH, lack of moisture, and discomfort with the exam itself. Future analyses will examine changes over time.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to characterize patients seeking treatment at a Female Sexual Medicine and Women's Health Program and examine their sexual/vaginal health issues. METHODS: Data from clinical assessment forms were extracted from 509 women referred to the Female Sexual Medicine and Women's Health Program during/after cancer treatment. The form consists of a Vaginal Assessment Scale (VAS), vaginal health items, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) (Sexual Activity Questionnaire [SAQ], Sexual Self-Schema Scale [SSS], Female Sexual Function Index [FSFI]), and exploratory items. RESULTS: Of 509 patients, 493 (97 %) completed PROs; 253 (50 %) received a pelvic examination. The majority had a history of breast (n = 260, 51 %), gynecologic (n = 184, 36 %), or colorectal/anal (n = 35, 7 %) cancer. Mean age was 51.2 years; 313 (62 %) were married/partnered. Approximately two thirds had elevated vaginal pH scores (5-6.5 [35 %] or 6.5+ [33 %]) and minimal (62 %) or no (5 %) vaginal moisture. Eighty-seven patients (44 %) experienced pain during their exam (23 % mild, 11 % moderate, 1.5 % severe, and 8.5 % not indicated). Fifty-three percent engaged in sexual activity with a partner; only 43 % felt confident about future sexual activity. Ninety-three percent were somewhat to very concerned/worried about sexual function/vaginal health. Approximately half had moderate/severe dryness (n = 133, 51 %) and dyspareunia (n = 120, 46 %). The mean SSS score was 60.7, indicating a slightly positive sexual self-view. However, 93.5 % (n = 429) had an FSFI score <26.55, suggesting sexual dysfunction. CONCLUSIONS: At initial consult, women reported vaginal dryness, pain, and sexual dysfunction. For many women, pelvic exams showed elevated vaginal pH, lack of moisture, and discomfort with the exam itself. Future analyses will examine changes over time.
Authors: Erin E Kent; Neeraj K Arora; Julia H Rowland; Keith M Bellizzi; Laura P Forsythe; Ann S Hamilton; Ingrid Oakley-Girvan; Ellen B Beckjord; Noreen M Aziz Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2012-09-28
Authors: Emily K Hill; Stacey Sandbo; Emily Abramsohn; Jennifer Makelarski; Kristen Wroblewski; Emily R Wenrich; Stacy McCoy; Sarah M Temkin; S Diane Yamada; Stacy T Lindau Journal: Cancer Date: 2010-12-23 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Ingvild Vistad; Sophie D Fosså; Gunnar B Kristensen; Arnstein Mykletun; Alv A Dahl Journal: J Womens Health (Larchmt) Date: 2007 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: Patricia F Harris; Patrick L Remington; Amy Trentham-Dietz; Catherine I Allen; Polly A Newcomb Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2002-06 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Stacy Tessler Lindau; Emily M Abramsohn; Shirley R Baron; Judith Florendo; Hope K Haefner; Anuja Jhingran; Vanessa Kennedy; Mukta K Krane; David M Kushner; Jennifer McComb; Diane F Merritt; Julie E Park; Amy Siston; Margaret Straub; Lauren Streicher Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2016-01-19 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Anne A Eaton; Raymond E Baser; Barbara Seidel; Cara Stabile; Jocelyn P Canty; Deborah J Goldfrank; Jeanne Carter Journal: J Sex Med Date: 2016-12-20 Impact factor: 3.802
Authors: Maria Ida Maiorino; Paolo Chiodini; Giuseppe Bellastella; Dario Giugliano; Katherine Esposito Journal: Endocrine Date: 2015-12-07 Impact factor: 3.633
Authors: Khaled El-Shami; Kevin C Oeffinger; Nicole L Erb; Anne Willis; Jennifer K Bretsch; Mandi L Pratt-Chapman; Rachel S Cannady; Sandra L Wong; Johnie Rose; April L Barbour; Kevin D Stein; Katherine B Sharpe; Durado D Brooks; Rebecca L Cowens-Alvarado Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2015-09-08 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Divya Yerramilli; Lorraine Drapek; Ryan D Nipp; Nora Horick; Samantha M C Moran; Bridget Noé; Sara M D'Arpino; Devarati Mitra; Theodore S Hong; David P Ryan; Don S Dizon; Jennifer Wo Journal: J Gastrointest Cancer Date: 2020-03