Openness to Using an External Penile Prosthesis for Maintaining Sexual Intimacy by Individuals with Erectile Dysfunction: A Cross-Sectional Study

Overview

Journal Sex Med

Publisher Oxford University Press

Date 2022 Aug 28

PMID 36030692

Authors

Fong Fu

Cassian J Duthie

Erik Wibowo

Richard J Wassersug

Lauren M Walker

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Introduction: Erectile dysfunction (ED) can lead to reduced sexual intimacy in men. The external penile prosthesis (EPP) is a device to help them participate in penetrative sex.

Aim: We investigate factors that may affect the willingness of individuals with ED to try an EPP and explore how the EPP could be presented most effectively to such patients to enhance their willingness to try an EPP.

Methods: Recruitment for this cross-sectional study occurred in-person and online. 147 participants (60.0 ± 14.3 years old; all experiencing self-reported ED) completed a survey containing both validated measures and questions specific to this study. The survey was open to English-speakers over the age of 18 who self-reported experiencing ED.

Main Outcome Measure: The primary outcome was participants' willingness to try an EPP based on their level of knowledge about using the EPP. Secondary outcomes included the influence of the sexual function, sexual distress, ED history, age, relationship duration, sexual flexibility on willingness to try an EPP. We also collected feedback from participants' on how and where they would like to be introduced to the EPP option.

Results: Most participants indicated a preference for being introduced to the EPP after trying some ED treatments (51.0%). Participants did not have strong preference regarding the setting where they were informed about the EPP. The majority however preferred having a sexual health therapist/counsellor (28.6%) or physician (25.9%) as the person introducing the EPP to them. Participants' willingness to try the EPP increased with more information about the EPP presented to them (P < .001). Personalization of the EPP to match one's own penis was preferred by 38.7% of participants. Referring to this aid as an 'external penile prosthesis' was significantly more preferred over alternative labels, such as a "belted prosthetic phallus" or "strap-on dildo" (Ps < .001 for both). Multiple regression analyses showed that only sexual script flexibility was associated with the initial willingness to try an EPP (P < .01).

Clinical Implications: Clinicians should consider presenting the EPP to men with ED, who desire maintaining penetrative sexual intercourse with their partners.

Strength And Limitations: This is the first study to explore factors influencing the willingness to try an EPP. Further research is needed to establish the efficacy of EPPs for maintaining sexual activity and satisfaction in the real-life setting.

Conclusion: This study informs clinicians about effective ways to introduce the EPP to patients with ED who wish to maintain insertive/receptive sex. Fu F, Duthie CJ, Wibowo E, et al. Openness to Using an External Penile Prosthesis for Maintaining Sexual Intimacy by Individuals with Erectile Dysfunction: A Cross-Sectional Study. Sex Med 2022;10:100559.

Citing Articles

Global web trends analysis of sex toys.

Deger M, Akgul B Sex Med. 2024; 12(5):qfae072.

PMID: 39600963 PMC: 11596685. DOI: 10.1093/sexmed/qfae072.

References

Elterman D, Petrella A, Walker L, Van Asseldonk B, Jamnicky L, Brock G . Canadian consensus algorithm for erectile rehabilitation following prostate cancer treatment. Can Urol Assoc J. 2018; 13(8):239-245. PMC: 6737730. DOI: 10.5489/cuaj.5653. View

Burnett A, Nehra A, Breau R, Culkin D, Faraday M, Hakim L . Erectile Dysfunction: AUA Guideline. J Urol. 2018; 200(3):633-641. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2018.05.004. View

Santos-Iglesias P, Walker L . Psychometric Validation of the Sexual Distress Scale in Men with Prostate Cancer. J Sex Med. 2018; 15(7):1010-1020. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2018.05.015. View

Salonia A, Adaikan G, Buvat J, Carrier S, El-Meliegy A, Hatzimouratidis K . Sexual Rehabilitation After Treatment For Prostate Cancer-Part 2: Recommendations From the Fourth International Consultation for Sexual Medicine (ICSM 2015). J Sex Med. 2017; 14(3):297-315. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2016.11.324. View

Cappelleri J, Rosen R . The Sexual Health Inventory for Men (SHIM): a 5-year review of research and clinical experience. Int J Impot Res. 2005; 17(4):307-19. DOI: 10.1038/sj.ijir.3901327. View

Rosenberger J, Schick V, Herbenick D, Novak D, Reece M . Sex toy use by gay and bisexual men in the United States. Arch Sex Behav. 2011; 41(2):449-58. DOI: 10.1007/s10508-010-9716-y. View

Duthie C, Calich H, Rapsey C, Wibowo E . Maintenance of sexual activity following androgen deprivation in males. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2020; 153:103064. DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2020.103064. View

Shigehara K, Kato Y, Iijima M, Kawaguchi S, Nohara T, Izumi K . Risk Factors Affecting Decreased Libido Among Middle-Aged to Elderly Men; Nocturnal Voiding is an Independent Risk Factor of Decreased Libido. Sex Med. 2021; 9(5):100426. PMC: 8498958. DOI: 10.1016/j.esxm.2021.100426. View

Herbenick D, Bowling J, Fu T, Dodge B, Guerra-Reyes L, Sanders S . Sexual diversity in the United States: Results from a nationally representative probability sample of adult women and men. PLoS One. 2017; 12(7):e0181198. PMC: 5519052. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0181198. View

10.

Yafi F, Jenkins L, Albersen M, Corona G, Isidori A, Goldfarb S . Erectile dysfunction. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2016; 2:16003. PMC: 5027992. DOI: 10.1038/nrdp.2016.3. View

11.

Warkentin K, Gray R, Wassersug R . Restoration of satisfying sex for a castrated cancer patient with complete impotence: a case study. J Sex Marital Ther. 2006; 32(5):389-99. DOI: 10.1080/00926230600835346. View

12.

Santos-Iglesias P, Bergeron S, Brotto L, Rosen N, Walker L . Preliminary validation of the Sexual Distress Scale-Short Form: Applications to Women, Men, and Prostate Cancer Survivors. J Sex Marital Ther. 2020; 46(6):542-563. DOI: 10.1080/0092623X.2020.1761494. View

13.

Rew K, Heidelbaugh J . Erectile Dysfunction. Am Fam Physician. 2016; 94(10):820-827. View

14.

Lebret T, Herve J, Yonneau L, Colau A, Kassardjian Z, Barre P . [Erectile dysfunction after radical prostatectomy: value of preoperative programming of intracavernous injections]. Prog Urol. 1999; 9(3):483-8. View

15.

Tatem A, Kovac J . External penile prosthesis as a novel approach to the treatment of erectile dysfunction. Transl Androl Urol. 2017; 6(Suppl 5):S795-S796. PMC: 5715180. DOI: 10.21037/tau.2017.11.01. View

16.

Duthie C, Graham K, Rapsey C, Wibowo E . Factors associated with various strategies for maintaining sexual activity after prostate cancer treatment. Int J Impot Res. 2021; 34(8):769-775. DOI: 10.1038/s41443-021-00466-z. View

17.

Li H, Gao T, Wang R . The role of the sexual partner in managing erectile dysfunction. Nat Rev Urol. 2016; 13(3):168-77. DOI: 10.1038/nrurol.2015.315. View

18.

Moses R, Anderson R, Kim J, Keihani S, Craig J, Myers J . Erectile dysfunction management after failed phosphodiesterase-5-inhibitor trial: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Transl Androl Urol. 2019; 8(4):387-394. PMC: 6732088. DOI: 10.21037/tau.2019.03.10. View

19.

Wassersug R, Wibowo E . Non-pharmacological and non-surgical strategies to promote sexual recovery for men with erectile dysfunction. Transl Androl Urol. 2017; 6(Suppl 5):S776-S794. PMC: 5715194. DOI: 10.21037/tau.2017.04.09. View

20.

NEWMAN H, Reiss H, NORTHUP J . Physical basis of emission, ejaculation, and orgasm in the male. Urology. 1982; 19(4):341-50. DOI: 10.1016/0090-4295(82)90186-8. View