Premium
Female sexual dysfunction: a new urogynaecological research field
Author(s) -
Dalpiaz Orietta,
Kerschbaumer Andrea,
Mitterberger Michael,
Pinggera Germar M.,
Colleselli Daniela,
Bartsch Georg,
Strasser Hannes
Publication year - 2008
Publication title -
bju international
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.773
H-Index - 148
eISSN - 1464-410X
pISSN - 1464-4096
DOI - 10.1111/j.1464-410x.2007.07442.x
Subject(s) - medicine , sexual function , psychosocial , sexual medicine , quality of life (healthcare) , sexual dysfunction , context (archaeology) , human sexuality , urinary incontinence , overactive bladder , lower urinary tract symptoms , gynecology , psychiatry , alternative medicine , surgery , pathology , gender studies , paleontology , prostate , nursing , cancer , sociology , biology
Associate Editor Michael G. Wyllie Editorial Board Ian Eardley, UK Jean Fourcroy, USA Sidney Glina, Brazil Julia Heiman, USA Chris McMahon, Australia Bob Millar, UK Alvaro Morales, Canada Michael Perelman, USA Marcel Waldinger, Netherlands OBJECTIVE To critically review published data on the urogynaecological aspects of female sexual dysfunction (FSD), as FSD is a developing multidisciplinary issue associated with several biological, medical and psychological factors. METHODS The reported prevalence of FSD is 19–50% and women with lower urinary tract symptoms or urinary incontinence (UI) not only complain of a deteriorating of quality of life but also of sexual life with an incidence as high as 26–47%. Furthermore, urogynaecological surgery represents an important but underestimated cause of FSD. Different databases (Pub Medical, Medline, serial titles, the Cochrane library and the NLM gateway database) were searched for the keywords ‘sexuality; sexual function; urinary incontinence; pelvic organ prolapse; questionnaire; symptom severity; epidemiology; quality of life; instruments; sexual health; vagina; vaginal surgery; pelvic surgery’. RESULTS There is a lack of a standardized instrument for assessing FSD. Recent studies investigate the impact of UI on sexual function, but the pathophysiology has not been elucidated. Vaginal or pelvic surgery does not affect overall sexual satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS Our investigation highlights the need for studies to assess the anatomical, physiological and sensory mechanisms related to FSD. Specific questionnaire are needed to quantify the problem. In the definition, symptoms assessment and preoperative counselling is important, to make a distinction between overall sexual function and individual parameters, such as psychosocial context. Only in this way, will it be possible to identify new therapeutic targets. A definition of success in urogyneacological terms should include aspects of quality of life and quality of sexual life. Immediate research in this field is needed.