(300) SEXUAL HEALTH PRACTITIONER PATTERNS FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF PATIENTS’ ORGASM CONCERNS

Abstract Introduction Medical knowledge of orgasm dysfunction has shifted in recent years to include a wide range of conditions that impact multiple domains of orgasm. It is currently unknown how sexual medicine practitioners are adjusting their practice patterns to ensure comprehensive assessment of patients’ orgasm concerns. Objective This study aims to elucidate the current state of orgasm assessment by surveying sexual medicine practitioners. This study’s primary outcome was to identify the method of orgasm assessment utilized by sexual medicine practitioners, exploring both the use of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient interviews. A secondary outcome was to explore practitioner reasons for utilizing their assessment tool as well as satisfaction with their current practice pattern. Methods Data were collected via an anonymous 33-question survey distributed from January 7, 2024, to April 14, 2024. The survey asked participants about their practice patterns for assessing orgasm via multiple choice and free response. Qualtrics software was used to create, distribute, and analyze the survey and NVivo14 was used to perform qualitative analysis. Results Of the 87 survey responses analyzed, 86 (99%) practitioners felt that it is important to assess orgasm as part of sexual health. Most respondents utilized interviews, with 56% of respondents using patient interviews alone and 34% combining interviews with validated PROMs. Regardless of the assessment modality, approximately 25% of the respondents expressed dissatisfaction with the current modalities for assessing orgasm function. Qualitative responses emphasized the benefits of interviews, including their ability to support detailed and individualized care. Additional barriers to using PROMs included practice limitations such as lack of time and practitioner lack of knowledge about and confidence in orgasm-specific PROMs. Conclusions This study’s findings suggest a significant reliance on interviews over standardized PROMs for assessing orgasm, likely due to the complex, multifactorial nature of orgasm dysfunction as well as lack of knowledge about or confidence in existing orgasm-specific PROMs. Respondents’ dissatisfaction with existing assessment modalities indicates a potential gap in adequate tools to address orgasm dysfunction. Future research should focus on developing more comprehensive, patient-centered assessment strategies that retain qualities of interviews and PROMs. Disclosure No.