Quality of life and associated factors in Brazilian women with chronic pelvic pain

23Citations
Citations of this article
97Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: Chronic pelvic pain (CPP) is a common and debilitating clinical condition in women. Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the quality of life (QoL) of women with and without CPP and to investigate factors associated with the QoL of women with CPP. Patients and methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted with 100 women with CPP and 100 women without CPP. QoL was evaluated using the abbreviated version of the World Health Organization QoL instrument (WHOQOL-BREF). Depression and anxiety were evaluated using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and sexual function was evaluated using the Female Sexual Function Index. Generalized linear models were used to analyze the data, permitting comparison of QoL scores and identification of the factors affecting QoL. Results: Mean age (± SD) was 37.8±8.0 and 37.2±9.6 years for women with and without CPP, respectively (P=0.648). Following adjustment, women with CPP had significantly lower QoL scores in the physical health (P<0.001) and social relationships’ (P=0.025) domains. Anxiety, depression, sexual dysfunction, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, pain intensity, lower family income, and not having a partner were factors negatively associated with QoL, while being postmenopausal, being employed, and having a child were positively associated with QoL in women with CPP. Conclusion: Women with CPP had poorer QoL than those without CPP. Factors affecting the QoL of women with CPP were identified, some for the first time in this population of women. Interventions targeting these factors may prove effective in minimizing the negative repercussion of CPP on QoL.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Da Luz, R. A., De Deus, J. M., & Conde, D. M. (2018). Quality of life and associated factors in Brazilian women with chronic pelvic pain. Journal of Pain Research, 11, 1367–1374. https://doi.org/10.2147/JPR.S168402

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free