4.7 Article

Examining associations between sexual behaviours and quality of life in older adults

Journal

AGE AND AGEING
Volume 44, Issue 5, Pages 823-828

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/ageing/afv083

Keywords

sexual behaviour; quality of life; older adults; older people

Funding

  1. Medical Research Council [MR/K026992/1] Funding Source: Medline
  2. Medical Research Council [MR/K026992/1] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Method: one hundred and thirty-three participants (mean 74 years, SD = 7.1) provided information about the frequency with which they participated in six sexual behaviours and the perceived importance of these: touching/holding hands, embracing/hugging, kissing, mutual stroking, masturbating and intercourse. Participants also completed the WHO Quality of Life scale, providing an overall quality of life score, in addition to the domains of physical health, psychological health, social relationships and environment. Participants provided information on their marital status, living arrangements and self-reported health. Results: both the frequency and importance of sexual behaviours were moderately positively correlated with quality of life (r = 0.52 and 0.47, respectively, both P < 0.001). In separate regression analyses, the frequency of sexual behaviours was a significant predictor of quality of life in the social relationships domain (beta = 0.225, P < 0.05), and the importance of sexual behaviours was associated with the psychological domain (beta = 0.151, P < 0.05), independent of the presence of a spouse/partner and self-reported health. Conclusions: with ageing trends, a broader understanding of the factors that influence quality of life in older adults is increasingly important. The current findings suggest that aspects of sexual behaviour and quality of life were positively associated. Researchers are encouraged to consider aspects of sex and sexuality when exploring determinants of well-being in later life.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available