Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Mar 8;13(1):qfaf011.
doi: 10.1093/sexmed/qfaf011. eCollection 2025 Feb.

Sexual satisfaction and function (SatisFunction) survey post-vaginoplasty for transgender and gender diverse individuals: preliminary development and content validity for future clinical use

Amine Sahmoud  1 , Rebekah Russell  2 , Erika Kelley  1   2   3 , Elad Fraiman  2 , Carly Goldblatt  2 , Matthew Loria  2 , Kirtishri Mishra  3 , Shubham Gupta  3 , Rachel Pope  3
Affiliations

Sexual satisfaction and function (SatisFunction) survey post-vaginoplasty for transgender and gender diverse individuals: preliminary development and content validity for future clinical use

Amine Sahmoud et al. Sex Med. .

Abstract

Background: Transgender and gender diverse individuals (TGDIs) are people whose gender identity is not in line with their sex assigned at birth, but current surveys used for cisgender patients addressing sexual satisfaction and function (SFS) do not fit the needs of this unique population.

Aim: The authors of this project sought to create and validate a new comprehensive survey in North American English that differs from the current options for TGDI post-vaginoplasty.

Materials and methods: Using the current literature on SFS as a foundation, a 26-item survey was created and distributed to 16 TGDI at least 3 months post-vaginoplasty. Feedback and review for content validity took place in the forms of interviews with the 16 TGDI, an expert panel, and the creation of a community advisory board.

Outcomes: Feedback was incorporated to transform the original 26-item questionnaire into a 32-question survey with eight domains, named the SatisFunction Survey Post-Vaginoplasty, which represents the preliminary development and content validity of the survey, with its clinical use not recommended until further validation steps are completed.

Results: Feedback focused on improving the clarity of questions to address sexual vs non-sexual behaviors, providing definitions of terms in the question stems for improved user understanding, including more questions on specific anatomic locations, addressing gender dysphoria as it relates to genital self-image, specifying type of vaginoplasty and only including questions relevant to those with or without a vaginal canal.

Clinical implications: The authors foresee clinical use of the survey for recurrent assessment in the postoperative period as well as post-revision.

Strength and limitations: Community-based research is essential in developing an assessment tool tailored to the unique needs of a specific population. This study presents the findings of preliminary content validation but requires further validation before clinical use, and is limited by a small sample size from a single-site institution.

Conclusion: Future directions involve completing the validation process for the survey with distribution to a larger TGDI population with other validated surveys with a subsequent cohort interview to address construct and divergent validity as well as reliability.

Keywords: anatomy; community advisory board; gender dysphoria; sexual function and satisfaction (SFS); transgender and gender diverse individuals (TGDI); vaginoplasty.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

This work was supported by the Patti Brisben Foundation, which provided funding for participant compensation and the time dedicated by the principal investigators. However, this support did not extend to all expert panel participants.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
A flowchart depiction of the validation process for study of phases 1–4 of validation as well as a depiction of changes made to number of questions within each domain after each phase.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Kachen A, Pharr JR. Health care access and utilization by transgender populations: a United States transgender survey study. Transgend Health. 2020;5(3):141-148. 10.1089/trgh.2020.0017. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Scheim AI, Baker KE, Restar AJ, Sell RL. Health and health care among transgender adults in the United States. Annu Rev Public Health 2021. Dec 9;43:503-523. (Volume publication date April 2022) [Epub ahead of print]. 10.1146/annurev-publhealth-052620-100313. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Age-Trans-Indi.... - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ding JM, Ehrenfeld JM, Edmiston EK, Eckstrand K, Beach LB. A model for improving health care quality for transgender and gender nonconforming patients. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2020;46(1):37-43. 10.1016/j.jcjq.2019.09.005. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ling Grant DS, Munoz-Plaza C, Chang JM, Amundsen BI, Hechter RC. Transgender care experiences, barriers, and recommendations for improvement in a large integrated health care system in the United States. Transgend Health. 2023;8(5):437-443. 10.1089/trgh.2021.0181. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Thomson RM, Katikireddi SV. Improving the health of trans people: the need for good data. Lancet Public Health. 2019;4(8):e369-e370. 10.1016/s2468-2667(19)30129-x. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources