Is tubal ligation effective on sexual dysfunction?
Main Article Content
Objective: Commonly used methods for preventing pregnancy in Turkey are withdrawal (30%), intrauterine device (27.2%), tube ligation (16.7%), condom (15.2), injection (8.9%), and combined oral contraceptive (1.9%). Protection from pregnancy is one of the most important factors affecting women's health. One of the preferred methods to protect against pregnancy is the 16.7% choice of tube ligation. Tube ligation is used as a contraceptive method but this method has some undesirable consequences. Our aim in this study is to investigate whether tubal ligation has effect on sexually dysfunctional and it is related to the process.
Material method: We included in our study 161 patients using tubal ligation and 77 non-prevention methods. We recorded the demographic characteristics of these patients. We applied the fsfi scale. This questionnaire is a scale of sexual function assessment consisting of 19 questions evaluating sexual functions.
Result: We did not find any difference in the total fsfi (female sexual function index) score between the patients who underwent tubal ligation and those who did not. However, we found a significant decrease in sexual desire and satisfaction in the tubal ligation group. In the subgroup analyzes of the fsfi score, results indicate that the correlation bonds with the subgroups of the tubal ligation group was deteriorated.
Conclusion: Tubal ligation is a preferred method for contraception target, and various studies related to the effects on health have been made. Also, this study determined that tubal ligation has no effect on total fsfi scores. However, subgroup work seemed to have an effect on demand and satisfaction. In addition all, the duration of tubal ligation didn’t have any effect on sexual function.
2. Schnarch D. Passionate marriage: keeping love and intimacy alive in committed relationship. Owl Books: New York, 1997 pp 37–39.
3. Shifren JL, Monz BU, Russo PA, Segreti A, Johannes CB. Sexual problems and distress in United States women. Obstet Gynecol 2008; 112: 970–978. | PubMed |
4. Lewis RW, Fugl-Meyer KS, Bosch R, Fugl-Meyer AR, Laumann EO, Lizza E et al. Epidemiology/risk factors of sexual dysfunction. J Sex Med 2004; 1: 35–39. | Article | PubMed | ISI
5. Nappi R, Salonia A, Traish AM, van Lunsen RH, Vardi Y, Kodiglu A et al. Clinical biologic pathophysiologies of women's sexual dysfunction. J Sex Med 2005; 2: 4–25. | Article | PubMed
6. Basson R, Wierman ME, van Lankveld J, Brotto L. Summary of the recommendations on sexual dysfunctions in women. J Sex Med 2004; 1: 24–34. | Article | PubMed
7. Goldmeier D, Judd A, Schroeder K. Prevalence of sexual dysfunction in new heterosexual attenders at a central London genitourinary medicine clinic in 1998. Sex Transm Infect 2000; 76: 208–209. | Article | PubMed | ISI | ChemPort |
8. Oberg K, Fugl-Meyer AR, Fugl-Meyer KS. On categorization and quantification of women's sexual dysfunctions: an epidemiological approach. Int J Impot Res 2004; 16: 261–269. | Article | PubMed | ChemPort |
9. Andrews WC. Approaches to taking a sexual history. J Womens Health Gend Based Med, suppl 2000; 1: 21. | Article
10. Frank E, Anderson C, Rubinstein D. Frequency of sexual dysfunction in normal couples. N Engl J Med 1978; 299: 111–115. | PubMed | ISI | ChemPort |
11. Caroline Costello, MPH, Susan D. Hillis, PhD, Polly A. Marchbanks, PhD,Denise J. Jamieson, MD, MPH, and Herbert B. Peterson, MD,for the US Collaborative Review of Sterilization Working Group. The Effect of Interval Tubal Sterilization on Sexual Interest and Pleasure VOL. 100, 2002 0029-7844/02/2002 by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Published by Elsevier Science Inc.
12. JR. Berman, SP. Adhikari, I. Goldstein, “Anatomy and physiology of female sexual dysfunction and dysfunction:classification, evaluation and treatment options”, Eur Urol, 38:20-29, (2000).
13. R. Basson, S. Althof, S. Davis, et al, “Summary of the recommendations on sexual dysfunction in women” J SexMed, 1:24-34, (2004).
14. R. Basson, J. Berman, A. Burnett, et al, “Report of the international consensus development conference on female sexual dysfunction: definitions and classifications”, J Urol 163:888-893, (2000).
15. Rosen R, Brown C, Heiman J, Leiblum S. The Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI): a multidimensional self-report instrument for the assessment of female sexual function. J Sex Marital Ther 2000; 26: 191–208.
16. Wiegel M, Meston C, Rosen R. The female sexual function index (FSFI): cross-validation and development of clinical cutoff scores. Journal Of Sex & Marital Therapy [serial online]. January 2005;31(1):1-20.
17. Andrews WC. Approaches to taking a sexual history. J Womens Health Gend Based Med, suppl 2000; 1: 21.
18. Cayan S, Akbay E, Bozlu M, Canpolat B, Acar D, Ulusoy E. The prevalence of female sexual dysfunction and potential risk factors that may impair sexual function in Turkish women.Urol Int 2004; 72: 52–57.
19. Oksuz E, Malhan S. Reliability and validity of the Female Sexual Function Index in Turkish population. Sendrom 2005; 17: 54.
20. Hentschel H, Alberton D, Sawdy R, Capp E, Goldim J, Passos E. Sexual function in women from infertile couples and in women seeking surgical sterilization. Journal Of Sex & Marital Therapy [serial online]. 2008;34(2):107-114.
21. Gulum M, Yeni E, Sahin M, Savas M, Ciftci H. Sexual functions and quality of life in women with tubal sterilization. International Journal Of Impotence Research [serial online]. July 2010;22(4):267-271.
22. Visvanathan N, Wyshak G. Tubal Ligation, Menstrual Changes, and Menopausal Symptoms. Journal Of Women's Health & Gender-Based Medicine [serial online]. June 2000;9(5):521-527
23. Gölbaşı Z, Şentürk A, Turan Z. Determination of sexual dysfunction in women using protective methods from pregnancy. Gazi University Journal of Health Sciences 2017: 1 (1): 09-17