4.6 Article

Sexual dysfunction in female subjects with fibromyalgia

期刊

JOURNAL OF UROLOGY
卷 174, 期 2, 页码 620-623

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000165155.33511.eb

关键词

female; fibromyalgia; sexuality; depression; quality of life

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: We investigated sexual function in females with fibromyalgia (FM) and evaluate whether coexistent major depression (MD) has an additional negative effect on sexual function. Materials and Methods: A total of 100 female subjects were enrolled in the study, including 40 with FM only, 27 with FM plus MD and 33 healthy volunteers as a control group. The diagnosis of MD was made according to Structured Clinical Interview for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual-IV interview and the Hamilton Depression Rate Scale was used to grade depression. Widespread pain and quality of life were assessed with the Lattinen Pain Scale and Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire, respectively. The Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) was used to assess sexual dysfunction. Results: All subjects were comparable in age, occupation and education. Mean FSFI total score +/- SD was significantly decreased in the FM and FM plus MD groups compared with that in healthy controls (21.83 +/- 5.84 and 22.43 +/- 7.0 vs 28.10 +/- 6.52, respectively, p = 0.001). However, the FSFI score was not significantly different between patients with FM only and FM plus MD (p > 0.05). Correlation analysis revealed a negative moderate correlation between total Lattinen pain score and FSFI score in the FM only and FM plus MD groups (r = -0.366, p = 0.047 and r = -0.403, p = 0.018, respectively). FSFI score did not correlate with FIQ and HDRS scores (p > 0.05). Conclusions: This study demonstrates that female patients with FM have distinct sexual dysfunction compared with healthy controls and coexistent MD has no additional negative effect on sexual function. Thus, female subjects with FM should be evaluated in terms of sexual function to provide better quality of life.

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

4.6
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