Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Evaluation of efficacy of sexual novelty as a novel therapeutic strategy to treat Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder in women in monogamous heterosexual relationships attributing reduced sexual desire to sexual boredom: A prospective randomized study

International Journal of Impotence Research (2025)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Hypoactive Sexual Desire Dysfunction (HSDD) in women has a complex origin, and addressing modifiable factors can lead to the best outcomes. One contributing factor is sexual boredom, particularly in women in monogamous relationships and we decided to evaluate sexual novelty as a therapeutic strategy in such women using prospective randomized study design. These women were recruited following screening using a Decreased Sexual Desire Screener (DSDS). Participants’ baseline sexual boredom was assessed using the Sexual Boredom Scale (SBS). Reasons for sexual boredom were identified, and customized novelty packages were developed accordingly. The participants were divided into two groups: Group A received psychotherapy alone (n = 196), while Group B (n = 202) received psychotherapy along with a customized sexual novelty package. Sexual desire levels were measured and compared at baseline and after a six-month intervention using the Elements of Desire Questionnaire (EDQ). The groups were similar in age, duration of monogamy, SBS scores, and baseline EDQ scores. Post-intervention results showed that the improvement in EDQ scores for the sexual novelty group was double that of the psychotherapy group (1.8 ± 0.3 vs 0.9 ± 0.1, p < 0.0001). Moreover, multiple regression models showed that lower age of the participant (p = 0.0253) and a longer period of monogamy (p = 0.0268) adversely affected sexual desire.

Access through your institution
Buy or subscribe

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Access through your institution

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The datasets generated and analysed in the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

  1. World Health Organization. 11th revision of the International Classification of Diseases,. Avaialble at: https://icd.who.int/browse11/l-m/en#/http%3a%2f%2fid.who.int%2ficd%2fentity%2f1189253773 Published 2019. Accessed Frbruary 13, 2023.

  2. Rosen RC. Prevalence and risk factors of sexual dysfunction in men and women. Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2000;2:189–95.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Parish SJ, Goldstein AT, Goldstein SW, Goldstein I, Pfaus J, Clayton AH, et al. Toward a more evidence-based nosology and nomenclature for female sexual Dysfunctions-Part II. J Sex Med. 2016;13:1888–906.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Clayton AH, Goldstein I, Kim NN, Althof SE, Faubion SS, Faught BM, et al. The International society for the study of women’s sexual health process of care for management of hypoactive sexual desire disorder in women. Mayo Clin Proc. 2018;93:467–87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Graziottin A, Maseroli E, Vignozzi L Female Sexual Dysfunctions: A Clinical Perspective on HSDD, FAD, PGAD, and FOD. In: Bettocchi, C, Busetto, GM, Carrieri, G, Cormio, L (eds) Practical Clinical Andrology. Cham: Springer; 2023. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-11701-5_8

  6. Pachano Pesantez GS, Clayton AH. Treatment of hypoactive sexual desire disorder among women: general considerations and pharmacological options. Focus (Am Psychiatr Publ). 2021;19:39–45. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.focus.20200039

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kingsberg SA. Attitudinal survey of women living with low sexual desire. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2014;23:817–23. https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2014.4743

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Klusmann D. Sexual motivation and the duration of partnership. Arch Sex Behav. 2002;31:275–87. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1015205020769

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bitzer J, Giraldi A, Pfaus J. Sexual desire and hypoactive sexual desire disorder in women. Introduction and overview. Standard operating procedure (SOP Part 1). J Sex Med. 2013;10:36–49. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2012.02818.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Rosa MN, Matthews SA, Giuliano TA, Thomas KH, Swift BA, Mills MM. Encouraging erotic variety: Identifying correlates of, and strategies for promoting, sexual novelty in romantic relationships. Pers Individ Dif. 2019;146:158–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Watt JD, Ewing JE. Toward the development of a measure of sexual boredom. J Sex Res. 1996;33:57–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Tunariu AD, Reavey P. Men in love: Living with sexual boredom. Sex Relationship Ther. 2003;18:63–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Clayton AH, Goldfischer ER, Goldstein I, Derogatis L, Lewis-D’Agostino DJ, Pyke R. Validation of the decreased sexual desire screener (DSDS): a brief diagnostic instrument for generalized acquired female hypoactive sexual desire disorder (HSDD). J Sex Med. 2009;6:730–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Grover S, Shouan A. Assessment scales for sexual disorders—a review. J Psychosexual Health. 2020;2:121–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/2631831820919581

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Revicki DA, Althof SE, Derogatis LR, Kingsberg SA, Wilson H, Sadiq A, et al. Reliability and validity of the elements of desire questionnaire in premenopausal women with hypoactive sexual desire disorder. J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2020;4:82.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Pyke RE, Clayton AH. Assessment of sexual desire for clinical trials of women with hypoactive sexual desire disorder: measures, desire-related behavior, and assessment of clinical significance. Sex Med Rev. 2018;6:367–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Pourhoseingholi MA, Vahedi M, Rahimzadeh M. Sample size calculation in medical studies. Gastroenterol Hepatol Bed Bench. 2013;6:14–7.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. de Oliveira L, Carvalho J, Nobre P. A systematic review on sexual boredom. J Sex Med. 2021;18:565–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Schnarch DM. Passionate marriage: Sex, love, & intimacy in emotionally committed relationships. New York, NY: WW Norton; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Perel E. Mating in Captivity. London: Yellow Kite Books;2007.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Hardy JW, Easton D. The ethical slut: A practical guide to polyamory, open relationships, and other freedoms in sex and love. Ten Speed Press;2017.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Morton H The impact of novelty on sexual desire and sexual satisfaction in committed relationships (T). University of British Columbia: 2017

  23. Jones AC, Robinson WD, Seedall RB. The role of sexual communication in couples’ sexual outcomes: a dyadic path analysis. J Marital Fam Ther. 2018;44:606–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Broder ED, Elias DO, Rodríguez RL, Rosenthal GG, Seymoure BM, Tinghitella RM. Evolutionary novelty in communication between the sexes. Biol Lett. 2021;17:20200733.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Aron A, Norman CC, Aron EN, McKenna C, Heyman RE. Couples’ shared participation in novel and arousing activities and experienced relationship quality. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2000;78:273–84.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Morton H, Gorzalka BB. Role of partner novelty in sexual functioning: a review. J Sex Marital Ther. 2015;41:593–609.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Burch RL, Salmon C. Rough sex and pornography preferences: novelty seeking, not aggression. J Evol Studies Consortium. 2022;12:1–9.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No financial support was received in support of the study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Andrology and Sexual Medicine, TSS Shripad Hegde Kadave Institute of Medical Sciences, Sirsi, Uttara Kannada District, Karnataka State, India

    Gajanan S. Bhat & Anuradha Shastry

Authors
  1. Gajanan S. Bhat
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anuradha Shastry
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Study concept and design: GB and AS. Acquisition of data: GB and AS. Analysis and interpretation of data: GB and AS. Drafting of the manuscript: GB. Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: GB and AS. Statistical analysis: Gb and AS. Approval of final version: GB and AS.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gajanan S. Bhat.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

All methods were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations. Informed consent was obtained from all the participants. Institutional ethical board approval of TSS Shripad Hegde Kadave Institute of Medical Sciences, Sirsi, India was obtained (EC/TSHKIMS/2018-19/05) for the study.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bhat, G.S., Shastry, A. Evaluation of efficacy of sexual novelty as a novel therapeutic strategy to treat Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder in women in monogamous heterosexual relationships attributing reduced sexual desire to sexual boredom: A prospective randomized study. Int J Impot Res (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-025-01187-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-025-01187-3

Search

Advanced search

Quick links