When sex hurts: Female genital pain with sexual consequences deserves attention: A position paper

Understanding Women's Responses to Sexual Pain After Female Genital Cutting: An Integrative Psychological Pain Response Model

The World Health Organization estimates that over 200 million women and girls have experienced female genital cutting (FGC). Many women and girls who have undergone FGC have migrated to areas of the world where providers are unfamiliar with the health needs associated with FGC. Both providers in Western healthcare systems and female immigrant and refugee patients report communication difficulties leading to distrust of providers by women who have experienced FGC. Sexual pain is one common problem requiring discussion with healthcare providers and possible intervention. Yet, existing clinical and research literature provides little guidance for assessment and intervention when sexual pain is a result of FGC. Several conceptual frameworks have been developed to conceptualize and guide treatments for other types of pain, such as back pain and headaches. In this article, we integrate four prominent models-the fear avoidance model, eustress endurance model, distress endurance model, and pain resilience model-to conceptualize sexual pain in women who have experienced FGC. The resulting integrative psychological pain response model will aid in providing culturally responsive clinical management of sexual pain to women who have experienced FGC. This integrative model also provides a theoretical foundation for future research in this population.

"Fulfilling His Needs, Not Mine": Reasons for Not Talking About Painful Sex and Associations with Lack of Pleasure in a Nationally Representative Sample of Women in the United States

INTRODUCTION

Although much research has examined correlates of pain during sex, far less research has examined why women have sex despite having pain and why they avoid telling their partner.

AIM

The purpose of our study was to examine women's reports of painful sex, including location of pain, whether they told their partner, factors associated with not disclosing their pain, and their reasons for not disclosing.

METHODS

We used data from the 2018 National Survey of Sexual Health and Behavior, a probability-based online survey of 2,007 individuals ages 14 to 49 years. We limited our sample to adult women who reported a sexual experience that was painful in the past year (n = 382; 23.2%). The primary outcome in quantitative analyses was whether women told their partner they experienced pain during sex. Associations with social identities and sexual health were explored via logistic regression. Those who did not tell their partner about painful sex were asked why; their accounts were coded and analyzed qualitatively.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Women were asked, "To what extent was this sexual experience physically painful for you?" Those who reported any pain were asked, "Did you tell your partner that you were in pain during sex?" and, if applicable, "Why didn't you tell your partner that you were in pain during sex?"

RESULTS

Of those reporting pain during sex, most said it was "a little painful" (81.6%) and occurred at the vaginal entrance (31.5%), inside the vagina (34.4%), or at or around the cervix (17.4%). Overall, 51.0% (n = 193/382) told their partner about their pain. Adjusting for age and wantedness, women who reported little or no event-level sexual pleasure had nearly 3-fold greater odds of not telling a partner about painful sex (adjusted odds ratio = 3.24; 95% CI, 1.43-7.37). Normalizing painful sex, considering pain to be inconsequential, prioritizing the partner's enjoyment, and gendered interactional pressures were the predominant themes in women's narratives.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Providers should ask about painful sex, if the woman continues intercourse despite pain, and how she feels about this as a means of assessing any sexual and social pressures.

STRENGTHS & LIMITATIONS

Strengths include the use of social theory in nationally representative survey research to examine how contextual factors influence sexual health, but experiences were largely limited to heterosexual interactions.

CONCLUSION

Many women do not discuss painful sex with their partners, lack of pleasure is significantly more likely among this group, and gender norms and cultural scripts are critical to understanding why. Carter A, Ford JV, Luetke M, et al. "Fulfilling His Needs, Not Mine": Reasons for Not Talking About Painful Sex and Associations with Lack of Pleasure in a Nationally Representative Sample of Women in the United States. J Sex Med 2019; 16:1953-1965.

Coping with painful sex: Development and initial validation of the CHAMP Sexual Pain Coping Scale

Background and purpose Recurrent vulvar pain is a common and debilitating condition which has received remarkably little attention in pain research. For instance, little is known about how these women cope with sexual activities, and there are no structured assessment tools. The purpose of this study was to explore coping strategies in this group, with a view to develop a measure to assess how women with vulvar pain cope with sexual activities. Methods The current study is based on a subsample from a longitudinal study about vulvar pain in a student sample consisting of women between 18 and 35 years old (N = 964). Only data from the ones reporting recurrent vulvar pain during the last six months (N = 289) were used in the analyses. First, the CHAMP Sexual Pain Coping Scale (CSPCS) was created, with the aim of assessing how women with vulvar pain cope with sexual activities. The scale was inspired by previous research on women with vulvar pain as well as well-known coping strategies in other pain populations. Second, the psychometric properties of the scale were explored by analyzing the factor structure and internal reliability. Third, validity features were examined in terms of criterion validity and construct validity. Results The analyses supported a three-factor solution, embracing the strategies endurance, avoidance and alternative coping. The internal reliability of the subscales turned out to be good, and the criterion validity was supported for all three subscales. The construct validity was clearly supported for the endurance and the avoidance subscales, but not for the alternative coping subscale. Conclusions The findings support the CSPCS as an instrument for assessing how women with vulvar pain cope with sexual activities. The strategies endurance, avoidance and alternative coping correspond with findings from earlier research. Endurance reflects a tendency to engage in and continue with sexual activities despite pain, while attempting to minimize or suppress thoughts of pain. Avoidance, on the other hand, involves efforts to stay away from sexual activities, in particular vaginal penetration, because of fear of pain. Alternative coping refers to endeavours to find alternative sexual activities that do not necessarily involve vaginal penetration. Even though this first study indicates that the CSPCS may be psychometrically sound, more studies are needed to confirm the psychometric properties and clinical application of this instrument. In particular, the construct validity of the alternative coping subscale needs to be further evaluated. Implications A valid instrument for assessing strategies for coping with sexual activities in this population has important clinical implications, since it provides a method that may enhance assessment procedures, be used in research, and stimulate the development of treatment.