Search

Introduction: Female sexual dysfunction is a frequent problem that may be caused by several factors, such as pregnancy and diabetes, and that can affect the woman's quality of life., Aim: The aim of this study was to assess the sexual function of pregnant women with gestational diabetes., Methods: This is a cross-sectional clinical study involving 88 women, among which 33 were pregnant with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and 55 were with low-risk pregnancy (LRP)., Main Outcome Measures: Sexual function was assessed using the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI), a self-applicable questionnaire validated in Portuguese. All the pregnant women answered the questionnaire between the 20th and 25th week of gestation. Data were submitted to descriptive analysis by using the SAS version 9.2 procedure PROC MEANS (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA), whereas Student's t-test was applied by using the procedure PROC TTEST (SAS Institute Inc.) at a significance level of ≤5% for all analyses., Results: The percentage of women presenting sexual dysfunction in each group was the following: 66.7% in Group GDM and 38.9% in the Group LRP, with significant difference between the groups (P = 0.03). However, no significant differences were found between the groups regarding sexual desire, excitement, lubrication, and pain. On the total score of FSFI, Group GDM had a score ≤26.55 (P = 0.03)., Conclusion: Diabetic pregnant women were found to have a higher incidence of sexual dysfunction as their scores were lower for all FSFI domains compared with LRP females., (© 2013 International Society for Sexual Medicine.)

Background: Health-Related Quality of Life Questionnaires (HRQOL) are humanistic outcome measure instruments both in clinical and in pharmacoeconomic studies. However, they should have their psychometric parameters evaluated so as to reflect the individual subjective assessment of quality of life., Objectives: To describe the quality of life profile of hypertensive patients and to assess the concurrent validity of the Minichal-Brazil instrument by comparing it to the generic World Health Organization's (WHO) assessment instrument known as WHOQOL-Bref., Methods: A total of 191 adult patients (72.8% females) with hypertension were interviewed. Approximately one third of these patients had their hypertension controlled. The mean HRQOL as measured by the total Minichal score was 69.7 (SD = 19.2; 95%CI from 66.9 to 72.4); the "mental status" domain and "somatic manifestations" domain scores were 69.1 (95%CI from 66.1 to 72.2), and 69.9 (95%CI from 66.5 to 73.2), respectively. The means for the WHOQOL-Bref instrument were: in the "physical" domain = 61.5 (95%CI from 59.0 to 64.1); in the "psychological" domain = 65.7 (95%CI from 63.2 to 68.2); in the "social" domain = 72.3 (95%CI from 70.0 to 74.5); and in the "environment" domain = 59.7 (95%CI from 57.7 to 61.7)., Results: Minichal significantly correlated (p<0.001) with WHOQOL-Bref as regards all its domains, except for the "environment" domain, which did not correlate with the "somatic manifestations" domain., Conclusion: Minichal-Brazil proved to be a useful tool in the assessment of HRQOL in hypertensive patients.

Objective: To analyze the results obtained in the evaluation of intra-vaginal pressure using three different brands of perineometers in nulliparous volunteers., Materials and Methods: Twenty nulliparous women with no anatomical alterations and/or dysfunction of the pelvic floor were enrolled in our study. All the women had the ability to voluntarily contract their PFM (Pelvic Floor Muscles), as assessed by digital palpation. The intra-vaginal pressure was assessed using three different brands of perineometer (Neurodyn Evolution, SensuPower and Peritron). Each volunteer was evaluated on three alternate days by a single examiner using a single brand of perineometer on each day. In the assessment, the volunteers were required to pull (contract) their PFM in and up as strongly as possible 3 times and to sustain the contraction for 5 seconds, with an interval of 30 seconds between each pull. For the statistical analysis, a concordance correlation coefficient was used to compare the values that were obtained with each brand of perineometer., Results: A moderate concordance (0.51) was found between the results from the Peritron and Neurodyn perineometers, a fair concordance (0.21) between the Peritron and SensuPower brands and a poor concordance (0.19) between the Neurodyn and SensuPower brands., Conclusion: The concordance of the measurements of the intra-vaginal pressure ranged from poor to moderate, suggesting that perineometers of different brands generate different results.