Evidence Hub

Determinants of Sexual Dysfunction in Parkinson’s Disease Patients: A Secondary Analysis of a Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study

A. Manuli, M. G. Maggio, Paolo de Pasquale, L. Raciti, S. Filoni, S. Portaro, G. Pucciarelli, R. S. Calabrò

Journal of Clinical Medicine, 2024

203 participants · 7 citations

Abstract

Background: Sexual dysfunction (SD) in Parkinson’s Disease (PD) patients is a common and distressing concern, although it remains an underdiagnosed and undertreated condition. Indeed, the prevalence of SD in PD ranges from 42.6% to 79% in men and from 36% to 87.5% in women. PD-related SD etiology is multifactorial and includes biological, psychological, and socio-relational factors. In a previous multicenter study on 203 PD patients, we found that there was no gender difference in dysfunction severity, although men were significantly more affected by SD than women. Methods: This paper is a secondary analysis of this previous multicenter study, and aims to investigate the potential risk factors that contribute to SD. The relationship between dysfunction and the experimental factors was assessed using Generalized Linear Mixed-Effects (GLME) model. Results: The final analysis was conducted on a sample of 177 patients (76 women), after excluding individuals with incomplete data, non-compliance with inclusion criteria, or delays in assessment tool administration. The analysis, performed using the GLME model (R2 = 0.68), revealed that gender (p = 0.01), age (p = 0.02), and depression status (HAMD) (p = 0.01) were significant predictors of SD. In contrast, other factors considered in the model, such as diabetes, and autonomic symptoms, did not significantly influence SD. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that age, gender, and depression are important predictors of SD in patients…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 203 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free