INTRODUCTION

Sexuality, according to the World Health Organization (WHO), can influence a woman’s quality of life by having effects on her emotional, physical, and psychological well-being, one of its fundamental components1. There is a widespread and mistaken belief that as people age, they lose both interest in and ability to have sexual relations2. However, many women continue to maintain sexual interest; in fact, 76% of women aged 42–52 years consider sex to be important to them3. Thus, approximately 67% of American women aged 65–74 years express the importance they give to sex4. At the same time, it is widely recognized that sexual activity declines during the transition to menopause and beyond4-7. Despite the importance of sexual function in women at this stage of life, sexual dysfunction also tends to increase with age8. Sexual dysfunction in women is usually associated with the menopausal transition and menopause since they are times characterized by hormonal, physiological, and social changes8. Up to 85% of women experience symptoms linked to this transition that vary in intensity and can affect their quality of life9. From a physiological point of view, the variation in hormonal levels negatively affects the elasticity of the vaginal mucosa and vaginal lubrication, which leads to vaginal atrophy. Additionally, as we age, the likelihood of weakening of the pelvic floor increases, leading to conditions such as dyspareunia, chronic pelvic pain, and pelvic organ prolapse8.

Pelvic floor problems encompass various problems that can affect this muscular structure. These disorders include situations such as urinary incontinence, pelvic organ prolapse in women, fecal incontinence, and pelvic-perineal regional pain syndrome, among others10. It is a public health problem with a high prevalence and can affect a quarter of adult women11 negatively, influencing the sexual function of women with these symptoms8,12,13.

Women with pelvic floor dysfunction may experience a decrease in their quality of life and compromised sexual function due to factors such as a negative perception of their body image, anxiety related to incontinence during sexual activity, feelings of shame, dyspareunia, and difficulties in achieving a satisfying orgasm14-16.

Since the relationship between pelvic floor disorders and sexual function in women during menopause has been investigated to a limited extent12,13, and considering that there are contradictory findings, and further research on the topic is recommended17,18. The aim of the present study was to investigate the association between pelvic floor disorders and sexual dysfunction in women during menopause.

METHODS

Study design, setting and participants

A cross-sectional study was carried out in Spain in 2022 with women who were in menopause. Women with difficulties in the Spanish language or with mental and cognitive problems that affected data collection for the study, were excluded. The women were recruited by convenience sampling.

To carry out this research, it was necessary to recruit at least 196 women based on the following criteria: a confidence level of 95%, an absolute margin of error of 7%, a prevalence in the population of menopausal women of 50% (this criterion is used because it is the most conservative since no recent prevalence data have been located and in addition, different dysfunctions with different prevalence are addressed) in relation to sexual dysfunction.

Data sources, measurement and variables

The recruitment of women was carried out in places frequented by them, such as health centers or GP surgeries, women’s associations and information centers, and after their interest in participating in the research, informed consent was obtained, followed by interviews carried out by two trained observers using a questionnaire as a script. The selection of women was carried out consecutively.

Data on sociodemographic and work characteristics, background and health status, as well as habits and lifestyle, were collected through a specifically designed and previously pilot-tested questionnaire, which did not require any posterior modification to launch the data collection.

Additionally, to evaluate the presence of pelvic floor problems, the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20) was used, which consists of 20 items composed by 3 subscales. The UDI-6 subscale, composed of 6 items, evaluates urinary symptoms, the CRADI-8 subscale evaluates colorectal symptoms, while the POPDI-6 subscale, with another 6 items, evaluates prolapse symptoms, all subscales have one score maximum of 100 points each. The PFDI-20 has a total score of 300 points, and a higher score indicates a greater symptom burden19. To determine the presence of prolapse, an affirmative response to question 3 (‘Usually have a bulge or something falling out that you can see or feel in your vaginal area?’) of the PFDI-20 Spanish version was considered. Fecal incontinence was assessed by PFDI-20 responses 9 (‘Usually lose stool beyond your control if your stool is well formed?’) or 10 (‘Usually lose stool beyond your control if your stool is loose?’), urinary incontinence by PFDI-20 responses 16 (‘Usually experience urine leakage associated with a feeling of urgency, that is, a strong sensation of needing to go to the bathroom?’), 17 (‘Usually experience urine leakage related to coughing, sneezing, or laughing?’), or 18 (‘Usually experience small amounts of urine leakage (that is, drops)?’), and pelvic pain by PFDI-20 responses 20.

Regarding the evaluation of female sexual function, validated in Spanish women, the Women’s Sexual Function tool (FSM-2) was used. This self-administered questionnaire consists of 14 questions. Responses were rated on a Likert scale from 1 to 5 and integrated into domains. The questions included in the sexual activity evaluation domains have a score from 1 to 5, while those in the descriptive domain do not have a quantitative value and serve to recognize important aspects, such as sexual frequency or the existence of a partner, as well as questions for the diagnosis of sexual dysfunctions in the patient or her sexual partner20.

With these measurements, sexual dysfunction was studied with the exposure (pelvic floor disorders) considering predictors (e.g. pelvic floor disorders scores) as well as potential confounders (e.g. age, BMI, smoking, alcohol consumption, etc.) and effect modifiers (e.g. type of delivery, etc.).

Definitions

Menopause

The time of life when a woman’s ovaries stop producing hormones and menstrual periods stop. Natural menopause usually occurs around the age of 50 years. A woman is said to be in menopause when she has not had a period for 12 months in a row8,9.

Pelvic floor disorders (PFDs)

These include urinary/fecal inconsistence, pelvic prolapse, and pelvic pain. A PFD occurs when the muscles or connective tissues of the pelvic area weaken or are injured. The most common PFDs are urinary incontinence, fecal incontinence, and pelvic organ prolapse. PFDs are more common among older women11,15,19.

Sexual dysfunction

Sexual dysfunction includes hypoactive sexual desire dysfunction, female sexual arousal dysfunction, female orgasmic dysfunction, female genital-pelvic pain dysfunction, persistent genital arousal disorder, postcoital syndrome, hypotonic orgasm, and painful orgasm20-27.

Ethical considerations

This study obtained approval from the Research Ethics Committee of the province of Jaén, with the reference number SPCV-0220/0302-N-20, on 26 March 2020. Prior to beginning the questionnaire, the participants received detailed information about the study and its objectives and expressed their informed consent before participating.

Statistical analysis

The information processing was carried out using the IBM SPSS v.28 statistical program. First, descriptive analyses were performed using absolute and relative frequencies for categorical variables, as well as means and standard deviation (SD) for quantitative variables. Subsequently, a bivariate analysis was performed using Pearson’s chi-squared test for categorical variables and analysis of variance when the independent variables were categorical and the dependent variables were quantitative (after checking the application assumptions). In this analysis, post hoc tests were also performed using Dunnett’s C test, which consists of a pairwise comparison based on the studentized range and is appropriate when the variances are unequal. In addition, this same analysis was performed using the non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis test due to the violation of normality. Finally, a multivariate analysis was performed using binary logistic regression to control confusion. Odds ratios (ORs) and adjusted odds ratios (AORs) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

A total of 197 women participated. The mean age was 57.7 years (SD=8.4), with a mean BMI of 26.6 (SD=4.3); 86.3% (170) of the participants were non-smokers and 53.8% (106) drank alcohol occasionally, 50.3% (99) of the women had University level in terms of education level.

Regarding personal history, 13.6% (7) of the women had a history of gynecological disease, and 4.6% (9) had gastrointestinal disease. Regarding obstetric history, 85.8% (169) of the women had been pregnant on more than one occasion and 33.5% (66) of the women had experienced a miscarriage. Regarding the type of delivery, 78.7% (155) of the women did not undergo a caesarean section, 71.6% (141) had an episiotomy, and 37.1% (73) who suffered an episiotomy had a tear at the same time (Table 1).

Table 1

Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of the study sample, a cross-sectional study, Spain 2022 (N=197)

Characteristicsn (%)
Age (years), mean (SD)57.7 (8.4)
30–49.927 (13.7)
≥50170 (86.3)
BMI (kg/m2)
Normal weight <2580 (40.6)
Overweight 25–29.979 (40.1)
Obese ≥3038 (19.3)
Civil status
Single6 (3.0)
Separated1 (0.5)
Divorced12 (6.1)
Widowed4 (2.0)
Common-law couple17 (8.6)
Married157 (79.7)
Education level
Primary level, uncompleted19 (9.6)
Primary level, completed22 (11.2)
Secondary level32 (16.2)
High school25 (12.7)
University level99 (50.3)
Employment sector
Administration17 (8.6)
Agriculture/livestock10 (5.1)
Commerce4 (2.9)
Industry and construction6 (3.0)
Retired44 (22.3)
Self-employed25 (12.7)
Public servant91 (46.2)
Monthly income (€)
<100025 (12.7)
1000–199961 (31.0)
2000–299961 (31.0)
>300050 (25.4)
Alcohol consumption
Never43 (21.8)
Occasionally (every 2–3 weeks)106 (53.8)
Only weekends18 (9.1)
Frequently (one day if another)21 (10.7)
Daily9 (4.6)
Smoking habit
No170 (86.3)
Yes27 (13.7)
Pregnancy
012 (6.1)
116 (8.1)
≥2169 (85.8)
Miscarriage
0131 (66.5)
156 (28.4)
≥210 (5.1)
Vaginal birth
034 (17.3)
130 (15.2)
≥2133 (67.5)
Cesarean births
0155 (78.7)
126 (13.2)
≥216 (8.1)
Instrumental birth
No116 (58.9)
Yes81 (41.1)
Episiotomy
No56 (28.4)
Yes141 (71.6)
Tear
No124 (62.9)
Yes73 (37.1)
Episiotomy and tear
No96 (48.7)
Yes101 (51.3)
Macrosomia
No149 (75.6)
Yes48 (24.4)
Mental health illness
No194 (98.5)
Yes3 (1.5)
Respiratory disorder
No191 (97.0)
Yes6 (3.0)
Gynecological disorder
No190 (96.4)
Yes7 (3.6)
Gastrointestinal disorder
No188 (95.4)
Yes9 (4.6)

[i] Gynecological disease: e.g. cervical, endometrial or ovarian cancer among others. Gastrointestinal disease: e.g. Crohn’s disease, gastric ulcer or irritable bowel syndrome.

Table 2 shows the distribution of the different domains that evaluate women’s sexual function (hypoactive sexual desire dysfunction, female sexual arousal dysfunction, female orgasmic dysfunction, female genital-pelvic pain dysfunction, persistent genital arousal disorder, postcoital syndrome, hypohedonic orgasm, and painful orgasm). It stands out that 51.3% (101) of the women reported having sexual dysfunction. In general terms, 79.5% (155) expressed satisfaction with their sexual health and 75.5% (148) indicated having communication with their partners in intimate relationships. However, 25.5% (50) experienced problems when initiating sexual interaction.

Table 2

Distribution of responses regarding women’s sexual function by category (FSM-2), a cross-sectional study, Spain, 2022 (N=197)

DimensionsEvaluation according to the Female Sexual Function (FSM-2) questionnaire
Sexual response and presence of sexual dysfunctionSevere disorder
n (%)
Moderate disorder
n (%)
No disorder
n (%)
Sexual desire18 (9.1)63 (32.0)116 (58.9)
Excitation10 (5.1)47 (23.9)140 (71.1)
Lubrication19 (9.6)47 (23.9)131 (66.5)
Orgasm23 (11.7)22 (11.2)152 (77.2)
Problems with vaginal penetration16 (8.1)-181 (91.9)
Anticipatory anxiety4 (2.0)6 (3.0)187 (94.9)
Relational aspects of sexual activityAbsence of initiation/sex communicationInitiation/sex communication moderateNo problem with initiation/ sex communication
Sex initiationa50 (25.5)35 (17.9)111 (56.6)
Level of sex communicationa26 (13.3)22 (11.2)148 (75.5)
Sexual satisfactionSexual dissatisfactionModerateSatisfactory
Satisfaction of sexual activitya11 (5.6)19 (9.7)166 (84.7)
General satisfactionb10 (5.1)30 (15.4)155 (79.5)
Descriptive categories of sexual activity
Reasons for sexual activity without vaginal penetration (VP)Due to painDue to fear of VPDue to lack of interest in VPNo sexual partnerInability of partner for VP
7 (43.8)1 (6.3)5 (31.3)2 (12.5)1 (6.3)
Frequency of sexual activityTimes per month
1–23–45–89–12>12
74 (38.1)64 (33.0)44 (22.7)10 (5.2)2 (1.0)
Sexual dysfunction
No96 (48.7)
Yes*101 (51.3)

* Sexual dysfunction is considered present if one of the 6 first dimensions are affected.

a Missing = 1.

b Missing = 2.

Regarding symptoms, 22.9% (45) stated that they had a severe or moderate problem reaching orgasm, and 29% (57) of women stated that they had never or occasionally felt excitement in the last month. Finally, of the 16 women who had difficulties with vaginal penetration, 43.8% (7) of the women indicated that it was because they felt pain, and 31.3% (5) attributed it to a lack of interest.

Table 3 indicates the bivariate analysis between the different pelvic floor disorders and their association with sexual dysfunctions. It was observed that women who experienced urinary incontinence [49 (42.6%) vs 66 (57.4%), p=0.043] and pelvic pain [12 (25.0) vs 36 (75.0), p<0.001] were more likely to report sexual dysfunction.

Table 3

Bivariate and multivariate analysis of pelvic floor problems and sexual dysfunction, a cross-sectional study, Spain, 2022 (N=197)

Sexual dysfunctionBivariate analysis
Pelvic floor problemsNo
n (%)
Yes
n (%)
OR (95% CI)p
Urinary incontinence0.043
No ®47 (57.3)35 (42.7)1
Yes49 (42.6)66 (57.4)1.81 (1.02–3.21)
Fecal incontinence0.703
No ®88 (49.2)91 (50.8)1
Yes8 (44.4)10 (55.6)1.21 (0.46–3.20)
Pelvic pain<0.001
No ®84 (56.4)65 (43.6)1
Yes12 (25.0)36 (75.0)3.87 (1.87–8.04)
Prolapse0.090
No ®87 (51.2)83 (48.8)1
Yes9 (33.3)18 (66.7)2.10 (0.89–4.93)
Score impact of pelvic floor problemsNo (N=96) Mean (SD)Yes (N=101) Mean (SD)Mean difference (95% CI)p
Prolapse symptoms (POPDI-6)9.99 (11.82)22.23 (23.31)-12.25 (-17.49 – -7.02)<0.001
Colorectal-Anal symptoms (CRADI-8)14.84 (15.76)22.43 (20.21)-7.59 (-12.70 – -2.49)0.002
Urinary symptoms (UDI-6)18.71 (19.29)32.38 (30.46)-13.68 (-20.82 – -6.54)<0.001
Pelvic function disorders Total (PFDI-20)43.53 (40.48)77.05 (68.41)-33.52 (-49.24 – -17.80)<0.001

® Reference categories.

The impact of pelvic floor problems was evaluated using the PFDI-20 questionnaire and its association with sexual dysfunctions. Women with sexual dysfunctions were found to have significantly higher mean scores on the POPDI-6 [9.99 (11.82) vs 22.23 (23.31), p<0.001], CRADI-8 [14.84 (15.76) vs 22.43 (20.21), p=0.002], and UDI-6 [18.71 (SD=19.29) vs 32.38 (30.46), p<0.001] subscales compared to those women without sexual dysfunction.

Table 4 below shows the results of the analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Kruskall-Wallis tests, which indicate that the mean scores on the impact of prolapse, colorectal-anal, and urinary symptoms showed statistically significant associations in most of the studied domains of sexual function. However, none of the subscales showed a statistical association with problems related to vaginal penetration. Furthermore, no statistical significance was observed between general sexual satisfaction and colorectal-anal symptoms. In addition, the mean scores, standard deviations, and different p values in the ANOVA and Kruskall-Wallis are shown, as well as the post hoc contrasts with the Dunnett C test.

Table 4

ANOVA and significance of the comparison of samples and scores on the scales used, a cross-sectional study, Spain, 2022 (N=197)

VariableAssessment of pelvic floor disorders scales
Sexual response and presence of sexual dysfunctionnPOPDI-6 Mean (SD)Post hoc test Dunnett CSig.CRADI-8 Mean (SD)Post hoc test Dunnett CSig.UDI-6 Mean (SD)Post hoc test Dunnett CSig.PFDI-20 Mean (SD)Post hoc test Dunnett CSig.
Sexual desire<0.001a
<0.001b
<0.001a
0.003b
<0.001a
<0.001b
<0.001a
<0.001b
Severe1844.44 (28.65)Moderate*
No*
34.03 (23.75)Moderate
No*
58.10 (35.22)Moderate*
No*
136.57 (84.56)Moderate *
No*
Moderate6317.59 (19.89)Severe*
No
21.08 (19.36)Severe
No
26.39 (27.95)Severe*
No
65.06 (61.03)Severe*
No
No11616.26 (12.88)Severe*
Moderate
15.08 (15.69)Severe*
Moderate
20.33 (19.90)Severe*
Moderate
46.59 (41.55)Severe*
Moderate
Excitation<0.001a
<0.001b
<0.001a
<0.001b
<0.001a
<0.001b
<0.001a
<0.001b
Severe1024.58 (28.29)Moderate
No
18.13 (22.57)Moderate
No
37.50 (37.68)Moderate
No
80.21 (85.79)Moderate
No
Moderate4731.29 (25.62)Severe
No*
29.12 (22.30)Severe
No*
41.76 (33.36)Severe
No*
102.17 (75.64)Severe
No*
No14010.63 (12.53)Severe
Moderate*
15.29 (15.42)Severe
Moderate*
19.49 (19.79)Severe
Moderate*
44.41 (40.87)Severe
Moderate*
Lubrication<0.001a
<0.001b
<0.001a
<0.001b
<0.001a
<0.001b
<0.001a
<0.001b
Severe1917.76 (22.82)Moderate
No
17.43 (18.87)Moderate
No
30.48 (30.05)Moderate
No
65.68 (67.02)Moderate
No
Moderate4730.23 (25.81)Severe
No*
29.06 (21.61)Severe
No*
41.49 (33.85)Severe
No*
100.78 (76.11)Severe
No*
No13111.04 (13.06)Severe
Moderate*
15.22 (15.86)Severe
Moderate*
19.37 (19.80)Severe
Moderate*
44.63 (41.69)Severe
Moderate*
Orgasm<0.001a
<0.001b
<0.001a
0.004b
<0.001a
<0.001b
<0.001a
<0.001b
Severe2334.06 (29.80)Moderate
No*
27.99 (22.25)Moderate
No*
48.56 (34.17)Moderate
No*
110.59 (81.87)Moderate
No*
Moderate2230.68 (25.15)Severe
No*
29.97 (24.96)Severe
No*
47.35 (37.01)Severe
No*
108.00 (83.22)Severe
No*
No15211.49 (13.33)Severe*
Moderate*
15.70 (15.68)Severe*
Moderate*
19.13 (18.91)Severe*
Moderate*
45.33 (40.54)Severe*
Moderate*
Problems with vaginal penetration0.128a
0.189b
0.228a
0.276b
0.142a
0.137b
0.122a
0.138b
SevereNENCNCNCNC
Moderate1125.00 (25.34)NC25.28 (22.98)NC37.12 (30.30)NC87.41 (71.90)NC
No18615.75 (19.13)NC18.35 (18.23)NC25.04 (26.16)NC58.14 (57.84)NC
Anticipatory anxiety<0.001a0.005b0.016a
0.034b
<0.001a0.006b<0.001a 0.004b
Severe438.54 (30.31)Moderate
No
30.47 (30.98)Moderate
No
61.46 (24.38)Moderate
No
130.47 (83.12)Moderate
No
Moderate643.06 (23.07)Severe
No
37.50 (16.87)Severe
No
50.00 (34.86)Severe
No
130.56 (65.06)Severe
No
No18714.93 (18.40)Severe
Moderate
17.88 (17.98)Severe
Moderate
24.18 (25.44)Severe
Moderate
56.99 (56.12)Severe
Moderate
Relational aspects of sexual activity
Sex initiation<0.001a
<0.001b
<0.001a
0.005b
<0.001a
<0.001b
<0.001a
<0.001b
Absence5029.42 (27.26)Moderate*
No problem*
28.00 (23.11)Moderate
No problem*
43.25 (34.43)Moderate*
No problem*
100.67 (80.98)Moderate*
No problem*
Moderate3514.40 (15.99)Absence*
No problem
17.14 (18.23)Absence
No problem
25.12 (26.34)Absence*
No problem
56.67 (52.28)Absence*
No problem
No problem11110.85 (12.72)Absence*
Moderate
15.01 (14.72)Absence*
Moderate
18.13 (17.50)Absence*
Moderate
42.98 (37.32)Absence*
Moderate
Level of sex communication<0.001a
<0.001b
<0.001a
<0.001b
<0.001a
<0.001b
<0.001a
<0.001b
Absence2642.63 (27.19)Moderate*
No problem*
41.23 (23.03)Moderate*
No problem*
62.98 (34.92)Moderate*
No problem*
146.83 (80.94)Moderate*
No problem*
Moderate2215.34 (20.14)Absence*
No problem
13.49 (16.88)Absence*
No problem
23.48 (26.87)Absence*
No problem
52.32 (58.44)Absence*
No problem
No problem14811.71 (13.49)Absence*
Moderate
15.52 (14.91)Absence*
Moderate
19.59 (18.39)Absence*
Moderate
46.83 (38.73)Absence*
Moderate
Sexual satisfaction
Satisfaction of sexual activity<0.001a
<0.001b
<0.001a0.005b<0.001a
<0.001b
<0.001a
<0.001b
Dissatisfaction1042.08 (37.45)Moderate
Satisfatory
31.25 (26.84)Moderate
Satisfatory
50.00 (37.01)Moderate
Satisfatory
123.33 (99.75)Moderate
Satisfatory
Moderate3030.42 (25.19)Dissatisfaction
Sastisfactory*
29.69 (24.11)Dissatisfaction
Sastisfactory*
52.36 (35.54)Dissatisfaction
Sastisfactory*
112.47 (80.96)Dissatisfaction
Sastisfactory*
Satisfactory15511.85 (13.52)Dissatisfaction
Moderate*
15.73 (15.56)Dissatisfaction
Moderate*
19.25 (18.70)Dissatisfaction
Moderate*
45.83 (40.22)Dissatisfaction
Moderate*
General sexual satisfaction0.003a
0.030b
0.514a
0.485b
0.003a
0.010b
0.011a
0.052b
Dissatisfaction1127.65 (26.89)Moderate
Satisfactory
24,15 (18.91)Moderate
Satisfactory
43.94 (26.83)Moderate
Satisfactory
95.74 (69.93)Moderate
Satisfactory
Moderate1927.41 (27.33)Dissatisfaction
Satisfactory
20.72 (22.85)Dissatisfaction
Satisfactory
38.60 (35.43)Dissatisfaction
Satisfactory
86.73 (80.91)Dissatisfaction
Satisfactory
Satisfactory16614.18 (17.36)Dissatisfaction
Moderate
18.70 (18.05)Dissatisfaction
Moderate
23.11 (24.55)Dissatisfaction
Moderate
55.41 (54.00)Dissatisfaction
Moderate

* The mean difference is significant at the 0.005 level.

a p-value ANOVA test.

b p-value Kruskall-Wallis test. NC: not calculated.

Finally, a multivariate analysis (Table 5) was carried out to control for confounding and determine which factors were associated with sexual dysfunction. Specifically, pelvic floor dysfunction evaluated through the PFDI-20 scale was identified as the main risk factor, observing that women who had a higher score on this scale were more likely to present sexual dysfunction (AOR=1.01; 95% CI: 1.01–1.02).

Table 5

Bivariable and multivariate analysis of the factors associated with sexual dysfunction, a cross-sectional study, Spain, 2022 (N=197)

VariableSexual dysfunctionBivariate analysisMultivariate analysis (adjusted regression analysis)
No
n (%)
Yes
n (%)
AOR
(95% CI)
pAOR
(95% CI)
p
Age (years)0.2390.815
30–49.9 ®16 (59.3)11 (40.7)11
≥5080 (47.1)90 (52.9)1.64 (0.72–3.73)1.12 (0.44–3.22)
BMI (kg/m2)0.2271.02 (0.95–1.10)0.540
Smoking habit0.1110.732
No ®79 (46.5)91 (53.5)11
Yes17 (63.0)10 (37.0)0.51 (0.22–1.18)0.50 (0.21–1.23)
Pregnancy0.9160.380
0 ®6 (50.0)6 (50.0)11
17 (43.8)9 (56.3)1.29 (0.29–5.77)0.39 (0.05–3.22)
≥283 (49.1)86 (50.9)1.04 (0.32–3.34)0.24 (0.02–2.77)
Vaginal birth0.1900.196
0 ®21 (61.8)13 (38.2)11
112 (40.0)18 (60.0)2.42 (0.89–6.63)5.48 (0.83–26.12)
≥263 (47.4)70 (52.6)1.80 (0.83–3.88)4.08 (0.47–35.48)
Cesarean birth0.4970.878
0 ®73 (47.1)82 (52.9)11
113 (50.0)13 (50.0)0.89 (0.39–2.04)1.22 (0.38–3.92)
≥296 (48.7)101 (51.3)0.53 (0.19–1.54)1.78 (0.19–16.73)
Instrumental birth0.3150.501
No ®60 (51.7)56 (48.3)11
Yes36 (44.4)45 (55.6)1.34 (0.76–2.37)0.78 (0.39–1.59)
Episiotomy0.2410.846
No ®31 (55.4)25 (44.6)11
Yes65 (46.1)76 (53.9)1.45 (0.78–2.70)0.90 (0.32–2.53)
Tear0.6420.634
No ®62 (50.0)62 (50.0)11
Yes34 (46.6)39 (53.4)1.15 (0.64–2.05)0.84 (0.41–1.72)
Mental health illness0.0890.999
No ®96 (49.5)98 (50.5)11
Yes0 (0)3 (100)NCNC
Respiratory disorder0.4430.765
No ®94 (49.2)97 (50.8)11
Yes2 (33.3)4 (66.7)1.94 (0.35–10.83)0.71 (0.11–4.58)
Gynecological disorder0.6500.845
No ®92 (48.4)98 (51.6)11
Yes4 (57.1)3 (42.9)0.70 (0.15–3.23)0.84 (0.14–4.99)
Gastrointestinal disorder0.279
No ®91 (48.4)97 (51.6)10.6751
Yes5 (55.6)4 (44.4)0.75 (0.20–2.88)0.43 (0.10–1.90)
PFDI-20 questionnaire score, Median (SD)43.53 (40.48)77.01 (68.41)1.01 (1.01–1.02)<0.0011.01 (1.01–1.02)<0.001

[i] AOR: adjusted odds ratio. BMI: body mass index. PFDI-20: Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory. Values in bold are statistically significant. ®Reference categories.

DISCUSSION

The women who experienced urinary incontinence and pelvic pain, had a higher frequency of sexual dysfunction. Specifically, pelvic floor dysfunction evaluated through the PFDI-20 scale was identified as the main risk factor, observing that menopausal women who had a higher score on this scale were more likely to present sexual dysfunction.

Sexual health in women is affected during menopause, and there are studies that, among other factors, relate it to the presence of pelvic floor dysfunctions14,21. Incidence reported by Verbeek and Hayward16 on sexual dysfunction in women with pelvic floor disorders amounts to 50–83%, with our prevalence being 51.3% of women who suffered from sexual dysfunction.

In relation to sexual function, in a study in which 93 women with urinary incontinence participated, altered items of disorders in sexual desire, orgasmic dysfunction, and sexual satisfaction were observed22. It is important to note that, in our results, no statistically significant alterations were observed with vaginal penetration.

Regarding fecal incontinence, Pauls et al.23, in a study carried out with women with this dysfunction, identified that women presented a decrease in sexual desire, sexual satisfaction, arousal, lubrication, and orgasmic capacity, but was only significant in the desired domain, whereas Visscher et al.24 observed statistical significance in all domains. In the case of pelvic pain, a study with 200 women, of which 100 had this dysfunction, and in line with our results, showed that the dimensions affected were the domains of sexual desire, arousal, lubrication, orgasm, and pain25. Furthermore, in the study by Verit and Verit with 200 women, including 100 with pelvic pain, it was observed that women who suffered from it reported worse sexual function with respect to desire, arousal, lubrication, orgasm, satisfaction, and greater frequency and severity of pain on vaginal penetration26.

Pelvic pain has been described as an important risk factor in sexual dysfunction, which, combined with other symptoms, can be responsible for up to 50% of sexual dysfunctions27. Faubion et al.28 determined that the impact of these symptoms on women’s sexuality can be very important. Finally, in our study, we identified that pelvic organ prolapse affects all sexual dimensions except penetration; in contrast, Tola et al.29 did not find that prolapse, or any other pelvic floor dysfunction, affects female sexual function.

Strengths and limitations

The strengths of the study include the use of validated instruments previously used in the population to determine both the sexual function of women FSM-2 and the presence of pelvic floor dysfunction in the population, PFDI-2019,20. On the other hand, certain limitations are recognized, such as the possible influence of selection and memory biases. However, we proceed by framing questions to minimize recall errors or focusing on recent experiences. Selection bias was addressed by defining inclusion criteria, although it may not be exempt from self-selection or under-representation of certain subgroups. The questionnaire was previously piloted with language adapted to facilitate reading and understanding at all educational levels; no further changes were required after this stage. However, we acknowledge that may be present, since the sampling method was convenient. Additionally, confounding bias was avoided by including all the variables that could impact the results obtained in the multivariate analysis. With the results obtained from this study, the basis could be established to develop appropriate therapeutic and preventive strategies, considering the high prevalence of this problem and its significant impact on the sexual health of a stratum of society that is especially vulnerable and ignored in this regard, menopausal women.

CONCLUSIONS

Pelvic floor dysfunctions in menopausal women are associated with their sexual health. Pelvic floor dysfunctions symptoms that influence sexual function are colo-rectal, urinary and prolapse. Pelvic floor disorders such as urinary incontinence and pelvic pain are those that most influence sexual function.