Skip to main content

ResearchResearch summary

How recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis affects quality of life

A matched Brazilian study found lower quality-of-life scores among women with culture-confirmed recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis.

In this pathway

Current topic
How recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis affects quality of lifeCurrent

Page trust and updates

First published
2026-07-15
Evidence as of
2026-07-15
Last updated
2026-07-15
Authorship
Candipedia Research
What changed
Initial draft summary created from the selected source.
Mogana Das Murtey and Patchamuthu Ramasamy, "Saccharomyces cerevisiae, SEM image", licensed under CC BY 3.0

Bottom line

Women with culture-confirmed RVVC reported lower quality of life than matched women without a VVC history, but this observational comparison cannot show causation or predict one person's experience.

Why this source matters

It measures the physical, psychological, social, sexual, and environmental burden with a validated questionnaire instead of treating recurrence as only an episode count.

Study and population

This matched observational study compared 100 women with clinical and culture-positive RVVC with 101 epidemiologically matched women who reported no previous VVC.

What was tested

Both groups completed the validated WHOQOL-Bref quality-of-life questionnaire.

Results

Overall quality of life averaged 59.7 versus 71.3 per 100 scale points, and satisfaction with health averaged 46.7 versus 67.1, for RVVC and comparison participants respectively. Every reported domain score was lower in the RVVC group.

Applicability

The result is relevant to group-level burden among people with repeatedly confirmed RVVC. It does not establish what causes unconfirmed symptoms or how much one person will be affected.

Limitations

The design was observational, the study was conducted in one Brazilian setting, and the strict culture-positive definition may not match other recurrent-symptom populations.

Contribution to the evidence

Supporting. It directly measures burden with a validated tool and a matched comparator, while remaining noncausal evidence from one setting.

Practical change

No practical change. It supports recognizing RVVC's burden; it does not choose a diagnostic or treatment route.

Funding and conflicts

Funding and conflicts of interest were not reported in the canonical source record.

Source

Read the original publication (published 3 July 2019).

Study type, population, and sample scale

Study type
Matched observational study using the validated WHOQOL-Bref questionnaire
Population
100 women in Brazil with at least four clinical and culture-positive episodes in one year, compared with 101 epidemiologically matched women with no history of vulvovaginal candidiasis
Sample scale
201 participants (100 RVVC; 101 comparison)
Read the original source

Results

  • On a 0-to-100 scale, mean overall quality-of-life scores were 59.7 in the RVVC group and 71.3 in the matched comparison group; mean satisfaction-with-health scores were 46.7 and 67.1, respectively.
  • Mean physical, psychological, social, and environment scores were 54.4, 56.8, 51.5, and 43.5 among 100 women with RVVC, compared with 68.5, 65.8, 69.1, and 57.4 among 101 matched women without a VVC history.

Limitations

Lower quality-of-life scores occurred across every measured domain.
The matched observational design shows association, not that RVVC caused every difference.
The RVVC group met a strict clinical and culture-positive recurrence definition.
Results may not transfer to self-diagnosed symptoms, other recurrence definitions, or other care settings.

Applies to

  • Group-level quality-of-life burden in women with repeatedly culture-confirmed RVVC similar to the Brazilian study population

Does not apply to

  • An individual prediction of distress, a cause-and-effect estimate, or people with unconfirmed recurrent symptoms

Contribution to the current conclusion

Supporting

A controlled study using a validated WHO quality-of-life instrument directly traces the physical, psychological, social, and sexual burden conclusion; its 100 RVVC and 101 matched comparison participants and observational limits can be explained clearly.

Related evidence map

Practical change or no change

No practical change. The study supports taking the burden seriously but does not determine diagnosis, treatment, or safety routing.

Funding and conflicts

Funding
Funding not reported.
Conflicts
Conflicts of interest not reported.
Paper date
2019-07-03

Sources

View all 1 source