Rafaela de Melo Silva1, Thuane H Da Roza2, Leonardo Luiz Barreti Secchi3, Paula Regina Mendes da Silva Serrão4, Ana Paula M Resende5. 1. Department of Physical Therapy, Federal University of São Carlos-Post-Graduate Program in Physical Therapy, Rodovia Washington Luis, Km 235, São Carlos, SP, CEP:13565-905, Brazil. fisiorafaelamelo@gmail.com. 2. State University of Santa Catarina UDESC-CEFID, Santa Catarina, Brazil. 3. Department of Physical Therapy, Federal University of São Carlos-Post-Graduate Program in Physical Therapy, Rodovia Washington Luis, Km 235, São Carlos, SP, CEP:13565-905, Brazil. 4. Federal University of São Carlos, São Carlos, SP, Brazil. 5. Federal University of Uberlândia, Uberlândia, MG, Brazil.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Studies have shown that athletes have three times increased risk of urinary incontinence compared to non-athletes, in addition to anal incontinence and sexual dysfunction (SD). This study aimed to assess the sexual and pelvic floor muscle (PFM) functions and to compare these variables among female athlete runners with and without SD and to identify predictive factors that may be associated with sexual function among the athletes. METHODS: Cross-sectional study including 90 female runners, who ran ≥ 20 km/week for at least 6 months, had had sexual intercourse in the last 4 weeks and were > 18 years old. PFM function was assessed by vaginal palpation and manometry. Women also answered the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Short Form to investigate presence of urinary incontinence. Sexual function was assessed by Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI); total scores ≤ 26.5 were considered to indicate SD. The scores of each FSFI domain and the total score were compared individually between each predictor using simple linear regression. In addition, multiple linear regression analysis was performed. RESULTS: Athletes with SD presented lower PFM strength. The results of the multiple linear regression analysis among all the predictor variables, FSFI domains and total score show that the Modified Oxford Scale is a predictor for the desire, excitation, lubrication, orgasm, pain and total score domains. CONCLUSIONS: Female runners with lower PFM strength presented worse sexual function regardless of age, parity, BMI and running practice time.
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Studies have shown that athletes have three times increased risk of urinary incontinence compared to non-athletes, in addition to anal incontinence and sexual dysfunction (SD). This study aimed to assess the sexual and pelvic floor muscle (PFM) functions and to compare these variables among female athlete runners with and without SD and to identify predictive factors that may be associated with sexual function among the athletes. METHODS: Cross-sectional study including 90 female runners, who ran ≥ 20 km/week for at least 6 months, had had sexual intercourse in the last 4 weeks and were > 18 years old. PFM function was assessed by vaginal palpation and manometry. Women also answered the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Short Form to investigate presence of urinary incontinence. Sexual function was assessed by Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI); total scores ≤ 26.5 were considered to indicate SD. The scores of each FSFI domain and the total score were compared individually between each predictor using simple linear regression. In addition, multiple linear regression analysis was performed. RESULTS: Athletes with SD presented lower PFM strength. The results of the multiple linear regression analysis among all the predictor variables, FSFI domains and total score show that the Modified Oxford Scale is a predictor for the desire, excitation, lubrication, orgasm, pain and total score domains. CONCLUSIONS: Female runners with lower PFM strength presented worse sexual function regardless of age, parity, BMI and running practice time.
Authors: Karim M Khan; Angela M Thompson; Steven N Blair; James F Sallis; Kenneth E Powell; Fiona C Bull; Adrian E Bauman Journal: Lancet Date: 2012-07-07 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Raquel E Wolpe; Kamilla Zomkowski; Fabiana P Silva; Ana Paula A Queiroz; Fabiana F Sperandio Journal: Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol Date: 2017-01-18 Impact factor: 2.435
Authors: Keyla Mara Dos Santos; Thuane Da Roza; Lislayne Luiza da Silva; Raquel Eleine Wolpe; Gesilani Júlia da Silva Honório; Soraia Cristina Tonon da Luz Journal: Phys Ther Sport Date: 2018-06-18 Impact factor: 2.365
Authors: M B A Almeida; A A Barra; F Saltiel; A L Silva-Filho; A M R M Fonseca; E M Figueiredo Journal: Scand J Med Sci Sports Date: 2015-09-15 Impact factor: 4.221
Authors: Fiona C Bull; Salih S Al-Ansari; Stuart Biddle; Katja Borodulin; Matthew P Buman; Greet Cardon; Catherine Carty; Jean-Philippe Chaput; Sebastien Chastin; Roger Chou; Paddy C Dempsey; Loretta DiPietro; Ulf Ekelund; Joseph Firth; Christine M Friedenreich; Leandro Garcia; Muthoni Gichu; Russell Jago; Peter T Katzmarzyk; Estelle Lambert; Michael Leitzmann; Karen Milton; Francisco B Ortega; Chathuranga Ranasinghe; Emmanuel Stamatakis; Anne Tiedemann; Richard P Troiano; Hidde P van der Ploeg; Vicky Wari; Juana F Willumsen Journal: Br J Sports Med Date: 2020-12 Impact factor: 13.800