4.7 Article

Vasomotor and sexual symptoms in older Australian women: a cross-sectional study

期刊

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
卷 105, 期 1, 页码 149-+

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.09.017

关键词

Vasomotor symptoms; older women; menopause

资金

  1. Monash University Postgraduate Research Scholarship
  2. Australian NHMRC Principal Research Fellow grant
  3. International Menopause Society Research Bursary

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: To determine the prevalence and severity of vasomotor symptoms (VMS) and sexual symptoms in community-dwelling older women, and to explore factors associated with VMS. Design: Population-based cross-sectional study. Setting: Not applicable. Participant(s): A total of 1,548 women aged 65-79 years. Intervention(s): None. Main Outcomes Measure(s): The presence and self-rated severity of VMS (hot flashes, night sweats, or sweating), and sexual symptoms (intimacy, desire, and vaginal dryness) were determined with the use of the Menopause Quality of Life (MenQOL) questionnaire. Result(s): All items of the vasomotor and the sexual MenQOL domains were completed by 1,532 and 1,361 of the study participants, respectively. Menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) use was reported by 6.2% of the women, and 6.9% reported using vaginal estrogen. Among the 1,426 women not using MHT, at least 1 VMS was reported by 32.8%. The prevalence of VMS rated as moderately to severely bothersome was 3.4%. A total of 54.4% of currently partnered women had sexual symptoms, and 32.5% reported vaginal dryness during intercourse in the past month. In the multivariate analysis, factors significantly associated with VMS were age, obesity, being a care-giver for another person, and bilateral oophorectomy. Conclusion(s): VMS and vaginal atrophy symptoms are common in community-dwelling older women, but they are predominantly untreated. The degree of distress caused by sexual symptoms among older women needs further exploration. (C) 2016 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据