| Literature DB >> 35856051 |
Elham Erfanifar1, Nasser Behroozi2, Seyed Mahmoud Latifi3, Zahra Abbaspoor1.
Abstract
Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of the cognitive-behavioral therapy program (CBT) on the sexual function and sexual self-efficacy of 100 women after childbearing.Entities:
Keywords: Cognitive-behavioral therapy; Counseling; Postpartum; Sexual dysfunction; Sexual self-efficacy
Year: 2022 PMID: 35856051 PMCID: PMC9287770 DOI: 10.1016/j.eurox.2022.100157
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol X ISSN: 2590-1613
The educational content of meetings.
| Session 1 | In this session, women, introduced themselves to each other, and the researcher (EE) explained the sessions’ rules, sexual function and sexual self-efficacy, the cognitive-behavioral model, and homework. |
|---|---|
| Session 2 | In this session, it explained how women can reduce their stress, according to the cognitive-behavioral model. |
| Session 3 | Incorrect thoughts and attitudes about sexual function and sexual self-efficacy after childbirth and the relationship between negative thoughts and well-being were explained in the third session. The homework was reviewed. |
| Session 4 | In this session, women were educated about the reconstruction and change of their unreasonable and negative attitudes and muscle relaxation. The homework was reviewed. |
| Session 5 | Women were trained about strengthening positive self-talk, successful relationships, cognitive challenges, and increasing realism. |
| Session 6 | The researcher educated muscle relaxation and individually educated women about stress and its symptoms. |
| Session 7 | Self-practicing, changing negative thoughts, and also the effects of revised thinking were educated. |
| Session 8 | In the 8th session, women were educated about meditation, coping steps, practice, and the summary of all sessions. At the end of the intervention, the women in the control group were given one compact disk on CBT. |
Socio-demographic Characteristics of Participants in CBT and control groups.
| Group | CBT | Control | P-value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variable | |||||
| 22.54 ± 4.45 | 21.77 ± 4.08 | 0.20 | |||
| high school | 7 (% 14.67) | 8 (% 11.97) | 0.27 | ||
| bachelor | 28 (% 66.68) | 30 (% 71.42) | 0.28 | ||
| Master | 15 (% 35.71) | 12 (% 28.57) | 0.30 | ||
| high school | 6 (% 11.42) | 4 (% 9.52) | 0.28 | ||
| bachelor | 26 (% 64.76) | 29 (% 69.04) | 0.30 | ||
| Master | 10 (% 23.80) | 12 (% 28.57) | 0.29 | ||
| Low | 15 (% 35.71) | 11 (% 26.19) | 0.18 | ||
| Average | 25 (% 59.52) | 27 (% 64.28) | 0.28 | ||
| High | 10 (% 23.80) | 12 (% 28.57) | 0.21 | ||
| Mode of delivery | Cesarean Section | 28 (% 66.66) | 30 (% 71.42) | 0.30 | |
| Normal delivery | 22 (% 52.38) | 20 (% 47.67) | 0.29 | ||
Different domains of sexual function and sexual self-efficacy in CBT and control groups before and after intervention.
| Variable | Before the intervention n = 42 | After the intervention n = 42 | P-value ** | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CBT | 10.43 ± 2.87 | 20.56 ± 5.22 | 0.001 | |
| Control | 10.13 ± 2.59 | 10.55 ± 2.66 | 0.578 | |
| P-value* | 0.578 | 0.001 | ||
| CBT | 2.11 ± 0.56 | 3.46 ± 0.83 | 0.001 | |
| Control | 2.20 ± 0.68 | 2.08 ± 0.70 | 0.532 | |
| P-value 1 | 0.577 | 0.001 | ||
| CBT | 2.55 ± 0.66 | 4.46 ± 0.97 | 0.001 | |
| Control | 2.76 ± 0.50 | 2.76 ± 0.50 | 0.598 | |
| P-value * | 0.622 | 0.001 | ||
| Lubrication | CBT | 2.18 ± 0.69 | 4.87 ± 0.97 | 0.001 |
| Control | 2.33 ± 0.75 | 2.50 ± 0.80 | 0.588 | |
| P-value * | 0.609 | 0.001 | ||
| CBT | 2.00 ± 0.49 | 4.28 ± 0.89 | 0.001 | |
| Control | 1.97 ± 0.40 | 2.03 ± 0.50 | 0.503 | |
| P-value * | 0.566 | 0.001 | ||
| dyspareunia | CBT | 3.88 ± 0.79 | 1.89 ± 0.52 | 0.001 |
| Control | 3.94 ± 0.50 | 3.13 ± 0.86 | 0.711 | |
| P-value * | 0.755 | 0.001 | ||
| CBT | 2.08 ± 0.47 | 4.66 ± 0.90 | 0.001 | |
| Control | 2.11 ± 0.52 | 2.15 ± 0.58 | 0.400 | |
| P-value * | 0.376 | 0.001 | ||
| CBT | 14.80 ± 3.66 | 23.69 ± 5.08 | 0.001 | |
| Control | 15.31 ± 3.35 | 14.10 ± 3.91 | 0.633 | |
| P-value 1 | 0.647 | 0.001 |
* =p value between the two groups
* *=P value within the two groups
Results of two-way analysis of variance related to sexual self-efficacy before and after the intervention.
| Variable | Indices | Index | Value | F | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CBT | Pillais Trace | 0.95 | 0.536 | 0.557 | |
| Wilks Lambda | 0.822 | ||||
| Hotelling's Trace | 0.116 | ||||
| Roy's Largest Root | 0.116 | ||||
| Pre-test * Post-test | Pillais Trace | 0.521 | 13.557 | 0.003** | |
| Wilks Lambda | 0.433 | ||||
| Hotelling's Trace | 1.167 | ||||
| Roy's Largest Root | 1.167 | ||||
| The interaction of the group, pre-test, and post-test | Pillais Trace | 0.600 | 8.657 | 0.004** | |
| Wilks Lambda | 0.478 | ||||
| Hotelling's Trace | 1.133 | ||||
| Roy's Largest Root | 1.133 |
Fig. 1: Flowchart showing recruitment of participants into the study.