Female Sexual Orgasmic Dysfunction and Genital Sensation Deficiency. (19th December 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Gruenwald, Ilan; Lauterbach, Roy; Gartman, Irena; Aharoni, Saar; Lowenstein, Lior
• Is Part Of: Journal of sexual medicine. Volume 17(2020)Supplement 2
• Page Start: 273
• Page End: 278
• Publication Date: 2019-12-19
• Subjects: Sexual Disorder -- Orgasmic Disorder -- Quantitative Sensory Testing -- Clitoral Stimulation -- Threshold; Sexual disorders -- Periodicals; Sex -- Periodicals; Sexual health -- Periodicals; 616.69005
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2019.11.001
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1743-6095

Abstract

Abstract: Introduction: Most studies on female sexual dysfunction (FSD), and female sexual orgasmic disorder (FSOD) in particular, have qualitatively examined cultural and educational factors; only few have quantitatively examined physiological factors. Aim: The aim of this study was to compare quantitative sensory testing (QST) between women for whom FSOD was their primary complaint and other women with FSD. Methods: In this retrospective study of women who visited a sexual dysfunction clinic, the study group comprised women for whom FSOD was their primary complaint, and the control group comprised other women with FSD. Sexual dysfunction was assessed by the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI). QST was performed with a thermal and vibration Genito-Sensory Analyzer (GSA; Medoc Ltd, Israel) aimed at the clitoral and vaginal areas. Main Outcome Measure: The main outcome was clitoral and vibratory sensory thresholds in accordance with the presence of FSOD. Results: The study group comprised 89 (45%) women, with a mean age of 37.6 ± 1.9 years; and the control group comprised 110 (55%) women, with a mean age of 37.5 ± 11.3 years. Both mean FSFI-FSOD and total FSFI scores were significantly lower in the study group than in the control group (0.97 ± 0.94 vs 1.91 ± 1.3, P < 0.001) and (11.9 ± 3.2 vs 15.6 ± 3.6, P < 0.001), respectively. Mean clitoral vibratory sensory thresholds were higher in the study group than in the control group: 2.02 confidence interval (CI) 1.12–2.64 vs 1.55 CI 1.12–2.41, P < 0.001. No statistically significant difference was found between the groups in vaginal vibratory thresholds: 3.7 CI 2.6–6.6 vs 3.4 CI 1.9–5.4, P = 0.14. Clinical Implications: The findings support the role of the clitoris in obtaining sexual orgasm, thus inferring a possible physiologic cause of FSOD in otherwise healthy women, beyond established psychological causes. Strength & Limitations: Assessments using an objective quantitative measure (QST) and a subjective tool (FSFI) in both the FSOD and control groups are strengths of this study. The retrospective design is a limitation. Conclusion: QST showed a direct correlation between vibratory clitoral stimulation and FSOD; Compared with the control group, women with FSOD are relatively insensitive to clitoral stimulation, but not to vaginal stimulation.