Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet 2018; 40(06): 322-331
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1656536
Original Article
Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Score Establishment and Brazilian Portuguese version of the Pregnancy Sexual Response Inventory (PSRI)

Definição de escores e versão em português brasileiro do Inventário da Resposta Sexual na Gestação (PSRI)
Cibele Vieira Cunha Rudge
1   Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho, Botucatu, SP, Brazil
,
Iracema de Mattos Paranhos Calderon
1   Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho, Botucatu, SP, Brazil
,
Ana Paula Machado de Almeida
1   Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho, Botucatu, SP, Brazil
,
Fernanda Piculo
1   Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho, Botucatu, SP, Brazil
,
Marilza Vieira Cunha Rudge
1   Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho, Botucatu, SP, Brazil
,
Angélica Mércia Pascon Barbosa
1   Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho, Botucatu, SP, Brazil
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

24 October 2017

19 April 2018

Publication Date:
06 July 2018 (online)

   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective To establish the Pregnancy Sexual Response Inventory (PSRI) scores for each domain before and during pregnancy, and to publish the Brazilian Portuguese version of the PSRI.

Methods Pregnant women were recruited during antenatal care; the PSRI was administered to 244 women prenatally at Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu, at Universidade do Estado de São Paulo (UNESP, in the Portuguese acronym). The PSRI scores were estimated based on the Kings Health Questionnaire (KHQ) and the Medical Outcomes Study 36-item short form survey (SF-36). The raw scale type was used to standardize the minimal value and amplitude of each domain. For each domain, the score varied from 0 to 100, and the composite score was obtained as the domain average. The composite score before and during pregnancy was determined by the sum of the scores of all specific domains for each divided by the full domain number. The categorization of the scale into quartiles was established when all PSRI-specific and composite scores were combined.

Results The composite and specific scores for each domain were categorized into quartiles: 0 < 25 as “very bad;” 25 < 50 as “bad;” 50 < 75 as “good” and 75 to 100 as “excellent.” The mean scores were lower during pregnancy than before pregnancy in 8 of the 10 domains. The Brazilian Portuguese PSRI version is presented.

Conclusion This study allowed the establishment of the PSRI composite and specific scores for each domain, and the categorization of scores into quartiles: very bad, bad, good and excellent. In addition, the Brazilian Portuguese version of the PSRI is presented in full for application in the Brazilian population.

Resumo

Objetivo Estabelecer os escores do Inventário da Resposta Sexual na Gestação (PSRI) para cada domínio antes e durante a gravidez, e publicar a versão do PSRI em português brasileiro.

Métodos Gestantes foram recrutadas durante o cuidado pré-natal; o PSRI foi administrado a 244 mulheres no pré-natal na Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu da Universidade do Estado de São Paulo (UNESP). Os escores do PSRI foram estimados com base no Kings Health Questionnaire (KHQ) e Medical Outcomes Study 36-item short form survey (SF-36). O tipo de escala bruta foi utilizado para padronizar o valor mínimo e a amplitude de cada domínio. Para cada domínio, a pontuação variou de 0 a 100, e o escore composto foi obtido pela média do domínio. O escore composto antes e durante a gravidez foi determinado pela somatória dos escores de todos os domínios específicos para cada período dividido pelo número total do domínio. A escala de categorização em quartil foi estabelecida quando todos os escores específicos e compostos do PSRI foram reunidos.

Resultados Os escores compostos e específicos para cada domínio foram categorizados em quartis: 0 < 25 como “muito ruim;” 25 < 5 0 como “ruim;” 50 < 75 como “bom” e 75 a 100 como “excelente.” As médias dos escores foram menores durante a gravidez do que antes da gravidez em 8 dos 10 domínios. Foi apresentada a versão PSRI em português brasileiro.

Conclusão Este estudo permitiu o estabelecimento dos escores compostos e específicos do PSRI para cada domínio e a categorização dos escores em quartis: muito ruim, ruim, bom e excelente. Além disso, a versão em português do PSRI é apresentada integralmente para aplicação na população brasileira.

Keywords

pregnancy - sexuality - questionnaires

Palavras-chave

gestação - sexualidade - questionários

Contributors

Rudge C. V. C., Calderon I. M. P., Almeida A. P. M., Piculo F., Rudge M. V. C. and Barbosa A. M. P. contributed with the project and interpretation of data, writing of the article, critical review of the intellectual content and final approval of the version to be published.


 

  • References

  • 1 Staruch M, Kucharczyk A, Zawadzka K, Wielgos M, Szymusik I. Sexual activity during pregnancy. Neuroendocrinol Lett 2016; 37 (01) 53-58
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Jawed-Wessel S, Sevick E. The impact of pregnancy and childbirth on sexual behaviors: a systematic review. J Sex Res 2017; 54 (4-5): 411-423 . Doi: 10.1080/00224499.2016.1274715
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Aydin M, Cayonu N, Kadihasanoglu M, Irkilata L, Atilla MK, Kendirci M. Comparison of sexual functions in pregnant and non-pregnant women. Urol J 2015; 12 (05) 2339-2344 . Doi: 10.22037/uj.v12i5.2881
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Corbacioglu Esmer A, Akca A, Akbayir O, Goksedef BP, Bakir VL. Female sexual function and associated factors during pregnancy. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2013; 39 (06) 1165-1172 . Doi: 10.1111/jog.12048
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Gałązka I, Drosdzol-Cop A, Naworska B, Czajkowska M, Skrzypulec-Plinta V. Changes in the sexual function during pregnancy. J Sex Med 2015; 12 (02) 445-454 . Doi: 10.1111/jsm.12747
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Basson R. The female sexual response: a different model. J Sex Marital Ther 2000; 26 (01) 51-65 . Doi: 10.1080/009262300278641
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Bartellas E, Crane JM, Daley M, Bennett KA, Hutchens D. Sexuality and sexual activity in pregnancy. BJOG 2000; 107 (08) 964-968 . Doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2000.tb10397.x
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Barclay L, Bond M, Clark M. Development of an instrument to study the sexual relationship of partners during pregnancy. Aust J Adv Nurs 1992; –1993; 10 (02) 14-21
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Rosen R, Brown C, Heiman J. , et al. The Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI): a multidimensional self-report instrument for the assessment of female sexual function. J Sex Marital Ther 2000; 26 (02) 191-208 . Doi: 10.1080/009262300278597
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Amaral TL, Monteiro GT. [Translation and validation of the Pregnancy and Sexual Function Questionnaire (PSFQ)]. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet 2014; 36 (03) 131-138 . Doi: 10.1590/S0100-72032014000300007
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Rudge CV, Calderon IM, Dias A. , et al. Design and validity of a questionnaire to assess sexuality in pregnant women. Reprod Health 2009; 6: 12 . Doi: 10.1186/1742-4755-6-12
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Tamanini JT, D'Ancona CA, Botega NJ, Rodrigues Netto Jr N. [Validation of the Portuguese version of the King's Health Questionnaire for urinary incontinent women]. Rev Saude Publica 2003; 37 (02) 203-211 . Doi: 10.1590/S0034-89102003000200007
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Stewart M. The Medical Outcomes Study 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). Aust J Physiother 2007; 53 (03) 208 . Doi: 10.1016/S0004-9514(07)70033-8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Leite AP, Campos AA, Dias AR, Amed AM, De Souza E, Camano L. Prevalence of sexual dysfunction during pregnancy. Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992) 2009; 55 (05) 563-568 . Doi: 10.1590/S0104-42302009000500020
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 World Health Organization. Defining Sexual Health: Report of a Technical Consultation on Sexual Health 28–31 January 2002 . Geneva: WHO; 2006
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Laumann EO, Paik A, Rosen RC. Sexual dysfunction in the United States: prevalence and predictors. JAMA 1999; 281 (06) 537-544 . Doi: 10.1001/jama.281.6.537
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Gökyildiz S, Beji NK. The effects of pregnancy on sexual life. J Sex Marital Ther 2005; 31 (03) 201-215 . Doi: 10.1080/00926230590513410
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Leite APL, Moura EA, Campos AAS, Mattar R, Souza E, Camano L. . [Validation of the Female Sexual Function Index in Brazilian pregnant women] Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet 2007; 29: 396-401 . Doi: 10.1590/S0100-72032007000800003
    CrossrefPubMed
  • 19 Ribeiro MC, Nakamura MU, Torloni MR, Scanavino MdeT, Scomparini FB, Mattar R. Female sexual function of overweight women with gestational diabetes mellitus - a cross-sectional study. PLoS One 2014; 9 (04) e95094 . Doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0095094
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Aslan G, Aslan D, Kizilyar A, Ispahi C, Esen A. A prospective analysis of sexual functions during pregnancy. Int J Impot Res 2005; 17 (02) 154-157
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Aslan E, Beji NK, Gungor I, Kadioglu A, Dikencik BK. Prevalence and risk factors for low sexual function in women: a study of 1,009 women in an outpatient clinic of a university hospital in Istanbul. J Sex Med 2008; 5 (09) 2044-2052 . Doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2008.00873.x
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Erol B, Sanli O, Korkmaz D, Seyhan A, Akman T, Kadioglu A. A cross-sectional study of female sexual function and dysfunction during pregnancy. J Sex Med 2007; 4 (05) 1381-1387 . Doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2007.00559.x
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 DeJudicibus MA, McCabe MP. Psychological factors and the sexuality of pregnant and postpartum women. J Sex Res 2002; 39 (02) 94-103 . Doi: 10.1080/00224490209552128
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Byrd JE, Hyde JS, DeLamater JD, Plant EA. Sexuality during pregnancy and the year postpartum. J Fam Pract 1998; 47 (04) 305-308 . Doi: 10.1080/00224499609551826
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Vannier SA, Rosen NO. Sexual distress and sexual problems during pregnancy: associations with sexual and relationship satisfaction. J Sex Med 2017; 14 (03) 387-395
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Vieira TC, de Souza E, Abdo CH. , et al. Brazilian residents' attitude and practice toward sexual health issues in pregnant patients. J Sex Med 2012; 9 (10) 2516-2524 . Doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2012.02809.x
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Johnson CE. Sexual health during pregnancy and the postpartum. J Sex Med 2011; 8 (05) 1267-1284 , quiz 1285–1286. Doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2011.02223.x
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar