2009European PsychiatryOpen access

Diagnosis and Assessment of Female sexual Dysfunction(s)

Richard Balon

Open full text 0 citations

Abstract

The first challenge in diagnosing female sexual dysfunction(s) originates in our diagnostic system. The traditional model of classifying sexual dysfunction is anchored in the sexual response cycle: desire - arousal - orgasm - resolution. However, as some experts have pointed out, this classification may be problematic in the area of female sexuality. Both the diagnoses of female hypoactive sexual desire disorder (FHSDD) and female arousal disorder (FSAD) probably need to be redefined and refined. Examples include adding the lack of responsive desire to the FHSDD criteria and creating categories of subjective FSAD and genital FSAD. The second challenge in diagnosis female dysfunction is the lack of solid diagnostic instruments, diagnosis-specific laboratory assays and other specific testing. Specific measures of female sexual functioning, such as Female Sexual Functioning Index, Profile of Female Sexual Functioning, Sexual Function Questionnaire, Sexual Desire and Interest Inventory, and Female Sexual Distress Scale were mostly developed as outcome measures. No solid diagnostic instrument for sexual dysfunction exists, not even a version of the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM sexual dysfunctions. The contribution of imaging techniques, such as ultrasonography, magnetic resonance imaging or thermography, to the diagnosis is unclear, and these techniques are far (if ever) from clinical use. Thus, a detailed comprehensive clinical interview combined with physical examination, possibly a gynecological examination, and in some cases laboratory hormonal testing remains the cornerstone of diagnosing and assessing female sexual dysfunctions.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The first challenge in diagnosing female sexual dysfunction(s) originates in our diagnostic system. The traditional model of classifying sexual dysfunction is anchored in the sexual response cycle: desire - arousal - orgasm - resolution. However, as some experts have pointed out, this classification may be problematic in the area of female sexuality. Both the diagnoses of female hypoactive sexual desire disorder (FHSDD) and female arousal disorder (FSAD) probably need to be redefined and refined. Examples include adding the lack of responsive desire to the FHSDD criteria and creating categories of subjective FSAD and genital FSAD. The second challenge in diagnosis female dysfunction is the lack of solid diagnostic instruments, diagnosis-specific laboratory assays and other specific testing. Specific measures of female sexual functioning, such as Female Sexual Functioning Index, Profile of Female Sexual Functioning, Sexual Function Questionnaire, Sexual Desire and Interest Inventory, and Female Sexual Distress Scale were mostly developed as outcome measures. No solid diagnostic instrument for sexual dysfunction exists, not even a version of the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM sexual dysfunctions. The contribution of imaging techniques, such as ultrasonography, magnetic resonance imaging or thermography, to the diagnosis is unclear, and these techniques are far (if ever) from clinical use. Thus, a detailed comprehensive clinical interview combined with physical examination, possibly a gynecological examination, and in some cases laboratory hormonal testing remains the cornerstone of diagnosing and assessing female sexual dysfunctions.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The first challenge in diagnosing female sexual dysfunction(s) originates in our diagnostic system. The traditional model of classifying sexual dysfunction is anchored in the sexual response cycle: desire - arousal - orgasm - resolution. However, as some experts have pointed out, this classification may be problematic in the area of female sexuality. Both the diagnoses of female hypoactive sexual desire disorder (FHSDD) and female arousal disorder (FSAD) probably need to be redefined and refined. Examples include adding the lack of responsive desire to the FHSDD criteria and creating categories of subjective FSAD and genital FSAD. The second challenge in diagnosis female dysfunction is the lack of solid diagnostic instruments, diagnosis-specific laboratory assays and other specific testing. Specific measures of female sexual functioning, such as Female Sexual Functioning Index, Profile of Female Sexual Functioning, Sexual Function Questionnaire, Sexual Desire and Interest Inventory, and Female Sexual Distress Scale were mostly developed as outcome measures. No solid diagnostic instrument for sexual dysfunction exists, not even a version of the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM sexual dysfunctions. The contribution of imaging techniques, such as ultrasonography, magnetic resonance imaging or thermography, to the diagnosis is unclear, and these techniques are far (if ever) from clinical use. Thus, a detailed comprehensive clinical interview combined with physical examination, possibly a gynecological examination, and in some cases laboratory hormonal testing remains the cornerstone of diagnosing and assessing female sexual dysfunctions.

Key concepts: Female sexual dysfunction, Sexual dysfunction, Orgasm, Sexual arousal, Hypoactive sexual desire disorder, Human sexuality, Personal distress, Psychology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Diagnosis and Assessment of Female sexual Dysfunction(s) — Research Paper | ScholarLens