Female sexual dysfunction in undergraduate medical education: a survey of U.S. medical students

Brian Goddard,Benjamin Brucker

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/sexmed/qfad049

2023-09-07

Abstract:Background: Physicians often report low levels of confidence in diagnosing and treating female sexual dysfunction (FSD), which may stem from inadequate education and exposure to the topic. Aim: The study sought to determine the extent to which FSD is covered in undergraduate medical education and evaluate student comfort with the topic and familiarity with treatments. Methods: We created a novel, 50-question survey to be administered online to any current U.S. medical student. Obstetrician-gynecologist clerkship directors at 146 U.S. medical schools were contacted and asked to invite any current student at their school to participate. A link to the electronic REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture) survey was distributed to eligible students via the clerkship directors. The survey collected data regarding (1) coverage of FSD and male sexual dysfunction (MSD) in preclinical and clinical curricula, (2) student self-ratings of comfort in hypothetical scenarios in which a patient exhibits symptoms of FSD or MSD, and (3) student familiarity with treatments for FSD and MSD. Outcomes: Outcomes included the proportion of students reporting that their school covered FSD/MSD in its preclinical/clinical curriculum, the mean comfort ratings for each of the FSD and MSD scenarios, and the proportion of students indicating knowledge of various FSD and MSD treatments. Results: A smaller proportion of students (N = 236) reported receiving instruction in FSD (58.5%) compared with MSD (78.4%) in their preclinical curriculum (P < .001). Students' average self-ratings of comfort in the sexual dysfunction scenarios were significantly lower for patients with symptoms of FSD compared with MSD (P < .001). Students had higher average self-ratings of confidence in FSD scenarios if their intended specialty was obstetrician-gynecologist (P = .003), if their school included FSD in its clinical curriculum (P = .01), and if they had ever participated in the care of a patient with FSD (P = .006). Clinical implications: There are important gaps in the coverage of FSD in undergraduate medical education that may be mitigated through improvements to curriculum and increased exposure to patients with FSD. Strengths and limitations: This is the first study, to our knowledge, to directly survey medical students regarding their educational experience and comfort with FSD. Our study was limited by a small sample size, the use of a novel and nonvalidated questionnaire, and the potential for bias given our sampling method. Conclusion: Medical schools must work toward improving instruction in FSD for their students to address these disparities and improve students' comfort with the topic.