Sexual function, quality of life, anxiety, and depression in women of reproductive age using hormonal, nonhormonal, and no contraceptive methods.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Hormonal contraceptive use has been related to adverse effects, including impacts on sexual function and sexual satisfaction, although the difference in the effects on sexual function with the use of hormonal vs nonhormonal contraceptive methods remains controversial. AIM: In this study we sought to compare the prevalence of dyspareunia, sexual function, sexual satisfaction, quality of life, anxiety, and depression between women using hormonal, nonhormonal, or no contraceptive methods and to compare these outcomes between the most frequently used contraceptive methods. METHODS: This cross-sectional study included sexually active women of reproductive age who were stratified into 3 groups women using hormonal, nonhormonal, or no contraceptive methods. Based on the use of questionnaires administered to the study participants, we compared sexual function in the 3 groups and more specifically among users of oral contraceptives, copper and hormonal intrauterine devices, and barrier methods. OUTCOMES: Participants completed 4 questionnaires to assess sexual function (Female Sexual Function Index), sexual satisfaction (Sexual Quotient-Feminine Version), quality of life (12-item Medical Outcomes Short Form Health Survey), and anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale). RESULTS: This study included 315 women classified into 3 groups on the basis of contraceptive use 161 in the hormonal contraceptives group (median [interquartile range] age, 24 [23-28] years), 97 in the nonhormonal contraceptives group (age 26 [23-30] years), and 57 in the no contraceptive methods group (age 28 [24-35] years). Dyspareunia prevalence showed no difference between the groups. In the quality of life domain, compared with women in the nonhormonal contraceptive group, women in the hormonal contraceptive group were younger and had lower sexual function satisfaction, reduced arousal, and heightened pain (P < .05), as well as higher anxiety and depression levels (P = .03, for both), increased pain (P = .01), and poorer overall health (P = .01). No difference was found between these groups in other quality of life domains. Regarding contraceptive methods, women using copper intrauterine devices had better sexual function, including higher rates of arousal and lower anxiety, than women using oral contraceptives (P < .05). CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS The results of this study highlight worse sexual function and sexual satisfaction and higher levels of anxiety and depression in women using hormonal contraceptive methods than in women using nonhormonal methods. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: The findings of this study strengthen the evidence of differences in sexual function between women using oral contraceptives and those using copper intrauterine devices. Sexual function was also compared among users of oral contraceptives, copper and hormonal intrauterine devices, and barrier methods. However, less frequently used contraceptive methods, such as hormonal injections and vaginal rings, could not be compared in this sample. CONCLUSION: Women using hormonal contraceptive methods were younger, had lower sexual function and satisfaction, and experienced higher anxiety and depression levels than women using nonhormonal contraceptive methods.