(027) Genitourinary Syndrome of Lactation: Patient-Reported Survey of Symptom Burden, Care Gaps, and Treatment Utilization in the Postpartum Period
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Introduction Despite the high prevalence of lactation in the postpartum period, the genitourinary consequences of this physiologic state remain underrecognized. The hypoestrogenic and hypoandrogenic milieu induced by lactation can give rise to genitourinary symptoms such as vaginal dryness, dyspareunia, urinary incontinence, and sexual dysfunction-collectively termed Genitourinary Syndrome of Lactation (GSL). These symptoms mirror aspects of the genitourinary syndrome of menopause but remain largely absent from postpartum care algorithms. Given their substantial impact on sexual health and quality of life, GSL represents an overlooked yet modifiable contributor to postpartum morbidity, warranting attention from providers in sexual medicine, urology, and gynecology. Objective To characterize genitourinary symptoms during lactation, assess quality-of-life impact, and identify gaps in care and treatment access among postpartum individuals. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional survey study from March to May 2025 using an anonymous, 30-item online questionnaire disseminated via social media and postpartum support groups. Eligible participants were postpartum individuals up to 24 months after delivery. Exclusion criteria included nulliparity, current pregnancy, prior genitourinary disorders, and incomplete responses. Participants were stratified into exclusive, non-exclusive, and non-lactating groups. Primary outcomes included self-reported genitourinary symptoms, treatments offered and utilized, and quality of life scores (0–100). Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, and multinomial logistic regression (α = 0.05). Qualitative data were assessed using thematic analysis of open-text responses. Results Among 1446 respondents (median age 36 years), 47.65% were exclusively lactating, 14.66% mixed feeding, and 37.69% non-lactating. Vaginal dryness was the most common symptom (exclusive: 100%; non-exclusive: 100%; non-lactating: 78.72%), followed by dyspareunia (57.04%, 50.00%, and 36.33%, respectively). Quality of life was significantly affected; 76.34% of those exclusive lactating reported difficulty with sexual activity. Despite high symptom burden, 63.81% were never asked about genitourinary symptoms by their provider, and 28.42% were offered treatment. Awareness of safe, lactation-compatible therapies was limited; 60.03% were unaware treatments existed. Vaginal estrogen and pelvic floor physiotherapy were the most commonly offered treatments but were recommended to fewer than 30% of symptomatic individuals. Significant associations were observed between lactation status and menstruation onset, symptom presence, and treatment patterns (p < 0.001). Qualitative responses emphasized severe pain, disrupted intimacy, and lack of clinical support. Conclusions Genitourinary symptoms during lactation are common, under-recognized, and insufficiently treated, with significant implications for postpartum quality of life. Clinical care models should incorporate routine screening for genitourinary symptoms, increase provider education on lactation-safe treatments, and improve patient access to multidisciplinary interventions. Disclosure No.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».