Lies Hendrickx1, Luk Gijs2, Erick Janssen3, Paul Enzlin4. 1. Department of Neurosciences, Institute for Family and Sexuality Studies, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. Electronic address: lies.hendrickx@kuleuven.be. 2. Department of Neurosciences, Institute for Family and Sexuality Studies, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. 3. Department of Neurosciences, Institute for Family and Sexuality Studies, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; The Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender, and Reproduction, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA. 4. Department of Neurosciences, Institute for Family and Sexuality Studies, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; University Psychiatric Centre KU Leuven, Center for Clinical Sexology and Sex Therapy, Leuven, Belgium.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Although impaired sexual function is relatively common, not all sexual impairments are associated with distress. To date, most studies on protective and risk factors for sexual distress have asked about distress in a more general manner and have failed to distinguish different dimensions of sexual distress. AIM: To examine the association of several intra- and interpersonal factors with personal, perceived partner, and interpersonal distress due to an impairment in sexual functioning in women. METHODS: This study is a cross-sectional representative population-based survey with a two-level random selection of Flemish women 14 to 80 years old from the Belgian National Register. The data of 520 sexually active heterosexual women with a partner (weighted N) and impairment in sexual desire (n = 291) and/or sexual arousal (n = 273) were used for analysis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Demographic information was obtained, and the five-item Mental Health Inventory, the Marital Adjustment subscale of the Maudsley Marital Questionnaire, and the four-item Dyadic Sexual Communication Questionnaire were used. Presence and severity of sexual impairments and associated sexual distress were assessed using the Sexual Functioning Scale. RESULTS: Severity and number of sexual impairments were predictive of all types of sexual distress. Also, for desire and arousal impairments, lower mental well-being predicted personal distress, and lower relationship satisfaction predicted perceived partner distress. For desire impairments, lower relationship satisfaction and less communication about sexual needs were predictive of interpersonal distress. For impairments in sexual arousal, lower mental well-being and lower relationship satisfaction were predictive of interpersonal distress. CONCLUSION: Personal, perceived partner, and interpersonal distress due to sexual impairments have different types of predictors. Clinical assessment and treatment could benefit from differentiating between different types of distress and the intra- and interpersonal factors that are associated with them.
INTRODUCTION: Although impaired sexual function is relatively common, not all sexual impairments are associated with distress. To date, most studies on protective and risk factors for sexual distress have asked about distress in a more general manner and have failed to distinguish different dimensions of sexual distress. AIM: To examine the association of several intra- and interpersonal factors with personal, perceived partner, and interpersonal distress due to an impairment in sexual functioning in women. METHODS: This study is a cross-sectional representative population-based survey with a two-level random selection of Flemish women 14 to 80 years old from the Belgian National Register. The data of 520 sexually active heterosexual women with a partner (weighted N) and impairment in sexual desire (n = 291) and/or sexual arousal (n = 273) were used for analysis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Demographic information was obtained, and the five-item Mental Health Inventory, the Marital Adjustment subscale of the Maudsley Marital Questionnaire, and the four-item Dyadic Sexual Communication Questionnaire were used. Presence and severity of sexual impairments and associated sexual distress were assessed using the Sexual Functioning Scale. RESULTS: Severity and number of sexual impairments were predictive of all types of sexual distress. Also, for desire and arousal impairments, lower mental well-being predicted personal distress, and lower relationship satisfaction predicted perceived partner distress. For desire impairments, lower relationship satisfaction and less communication about sexual needs were predictive of interpersonal distress. For impairments in sexual arousal, lower mental well-being and lower relationship satisfaction were predictive of interpersonal distress. CONCLUSION: Personal, perceived partner, and interpersonal distress due to sexual impairments have different types of predictors. Clinical assessment and treatment could benefit from differentiating between different types of distress and the intra- and interpersonal factors that are associated with them.