Susan D Reed1, Janet S Carpenter2, Joseph Larson3, Caroline M Mitchell4, Jan Shifren4, Julia Heiman5, Nancy Fugate Woods6, Stacy Tessler Lindau7, Andrea Z LaCroix8, Katherine A Guthrie3. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA. 2. Indiana University School of Nursing, Indianapolis, IN. 3. Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA. 4. Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. 5. Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Indiana University, Bloomington IN. 6. School of Nursing, University of Washington, Seattle, WA. 7. Departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Medicine-Geriatrics, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL; and. 8. Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, University of California-San Diego, La Jolla, CA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Evaluate appropriateness of the current Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI)-19 value of <26.6 to designate female sexual dysfunction (FSD) in postmenopausal women, using the Female Sexual Distress-Revised (FSDS-R) scale to measure distress. METHODS: Participant-level data containing standardized measures from five completed Menopause Strategies: Finding Lasting Answers for Symptoms and Health trials was pooled. Baseline characteristics and FSFI-19 scores were compared across trials (F-test, homogeneity). FSFI-19 score associations with the FSDS-R were described. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted to illustrate the choice of optimal FSFI-19 value to predict sexual distress. ROC curves were also estimated adjusting for trial number, clinical center, age, education, race, smoking, and BMI. RESULTS: Nine hundred ninety eight women (79.2% postmenopausal), mean age 55.9 (SD 4.8) had complete FSFI-19, FSDS-R, and covariate data. Baseline mean FSFI-19 score among all participants and sexually active participants was 18.7 (SD 9.5) and 22.0 (SD 7.2), respectively. There was a consistent pattern across the trials of inverse association between poorer sexual function (FSFI-19) and greater sexual distress. Based on the ROC curve showing the likelihood of FSDS-R frequent or greater distress according to cut points of FSFI, the optimal cut point for FSD was FSFI-19 <21 for all participants. This cut point corresponded to sensitivity 87.2% (95% CI, 83.4-91.0), specificity 57.9% (95% CI, 54.3-61.6) and adjusted area under the ROC curve 78.8% (95% CI, 75.8-81.8). CONCLUSIONS: A new FSFI-19 cut point of ≥21 should be considered to describe normal sexual function in periand postmenopausal women as opposed to the standard cut point of >26.6. VIDEO SUMMARY: http://links.lww.com/MENO/A915.
OBJECTIVE: Evaluate appropriateness of the current Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI)-19 value of <26.6 to designate female sexual dysfunction (FSD) in postmenopausal women, using the Female Sexual Distress-Revised (FSDS-R) scale to measure distress. METHODS: Participant-level data containing standardized measures from five completed Menopause Strategies: Finding Lasting Answers for Symptoms and Health trials was pooled. Baseline characteristics and FSFI-19 scores were compared across trials (F-test, homogeneity). FSFI-19 score associations with the FSDS-R were described. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted to illustrate the choice of optimal FSFI-19 value to predict sexual distress. ROC curves were also estimated adjusting for trial number, clinical center, age, education, race, smoking, and BMI. RESULTS: Nine hundred ninety eight women (79.2% postmenopausal), mean age 55.9 (SD 4.8) had complete FSFI-19, FSDS-R, and covariate data. Baseline mean FSFI-19 score among all participants and sexually active participants was 18.7 (SD 9.5) and 22.0 (SD 7.2), respectively. There was a consistent pattern across the trials of inverse association between poorer sexual function (FSFI-19) and greater sexual distress. Based on the ROC curve showing the likelihood of FSDS-R frequent or greater distress according to cut points of FSFI, the optimal cut point for FSD was FSFI-19 <21 for all participants. This cut point corresponded to sensitivity 87.2% (95% CI, 83.4-91.0), specificity 57.9% (95% CI, 54.3-61.6) and adjusted area under the ROC curve 78.8% (95% CI, 75.8-81.8). CONCLUSIONS: A new FSFI-19 cut point of ≥21 should be considered to describe normal sexual function in periand postmenopausal women as opposed to the standard cut point of >26.6. VIDEO SUMMARY: http://links.lww.com/MENO/A915.
Authors: Christiana von Hippel; Avanti Adhia; Shoshana Rosenberg; S Bryn Austin; Ann Partridge; Rulla Tamimi Journal: Womens Health Issues Date: 2019-05-23
Authors: Jan L Shifren; Brigitta U Monz; Patricia A Russo; Anthony Segreti; Catherine B Johannes Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2008-11 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Andrea M Isidori; Carlotta Pozza; Katherine Esposito; Dario Giugliano; Susanna Morano; Linda Vignozzi; Giovanni Corona; Andrea Lenzi; Emmanuele A Jannini Journal: J Sex Med Date: 2009-12-01 Impact factor: 3.802
Authors: Fernand Labrie; Leonard Derogatis; David F Archer; William Koltun; Andrée Vachon; Douglas Young; Louise Frenette; David Portman; Marlene Montesino; Isabelle Côté; Julie Parent; Lyne Lavoie; Adam Beauregard; Céline Martel; Mario Vaillancourt; John Balser; Érick Moyneur Journal: J Sex Med Date: 2015-11-23 Impact factor: 3.802
Authors: Ellen W Freeman; Katherine A Guthrie; Bette Caan; Barbara Sternfeld; Lee S Cohen; Hadine Joffe; Janet S Carpenter; Garnet L Anderson; Joseph C Larson; Kristine E Ensrud; Susan D Reed; Katherine M Newton; Sheryl Sherman; Mary D Sammel; Andrea Z LaCroix Journal: JAMA Date: 2011-01-19 Impact factor: 157.335
Authors: Carolyn J Gibson; Alison J Huang; Joseph C Larson; Caroline Mitchell; Susan Diem; Andrea LaCroix; Katherine M Newton; Susan D Reed; Katherine A Guthrie Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2020-01-15 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Katherine M Newton; Janet S Carpenter; Katherine A Guthrie; Garnet L Anderson; Bette Caan; Lee S Cohen; Kristine E Ensrud; Ellen W Freeman; Hadine Joffe; Barbara Sternfeld; Susan D Reed; Sheryl Sherman; Mary D Sammel; Kurt Kroenke; Joseph C Larson; Andrea Z Lacroix Journal: Menopause Date: 2014-01 Impact factor: 3.310
Authors: Susan D Reed; Caroline M Mitchell; Hadine Joffe; Lee Cohen; Jan L Shifren; Katherine M Newton; Ellen W Freeman; Joseph C Larson; JoAnn E Manson; Andrea Z LaCroix; Katherine A Guthrie Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2014-08 Impact factor: 7.623