Different Evaluations Exist between Men with Erectile Dysfunction and Their Female Partners When Using Erectile Hardness Model: An Interesting, Observational, and Cross-Sectional Field Survey

Abstract EN

It is an interesting clinical phenomenon that when evaluating the erectile function of men with erectile dysfunction by couples, respectively, using the erectile hardness model, there will exist the evaluation difference between men and their female partners.

This phenomenon reflects the problem of communication and cognition between husband and wife in ED patients.

To explore the influencing factors associated with this clinical phenomenon, we conducted this interesting, observational, and cross-sectional field survey.

We enrolled 385 couples from the andrology clinics of the first affiliated hospital of Anhui Medical University from December 2017 to December 2018.

The demographic data of couples, the medical history, sexuality and the characteristics of ED, and anxiety and depression of the couples were collected through face-to-face interview and questionnaires.

The couples were divided into two groups containing 238 couples and 147 couples, respectively.

We divided couples into difference group including couples which have inconsistent evaluation results from touching the erectile hardness model and no difference group including couples which have consistent evaluation results from touching the erectile hardness model, respectively.

The difference group where the couples share different evaluation results reported higher erectile hardness grade from men than from their female partners (male > female: 73.11% vs.

male < female: 26.89%).

The scores of IIEF-5 in difference group and no difference group are 13.43 ± 5.75 and 16.82 ± 8.23, respectively.

The average grades evaluated from men and women in difference group are 2.79 ± 0.85 and 2.45 ± 0.63, respectively.

The average grades evaluated from couples in no difference group are 3.02 ± 0.45.

Through statistical comparison and logistic regression analysis, duration of ED > 16 months, seeking treatment from female, negative communication state, and depression from men are the relevant factors accounting for the different evaluation results.

This phenomenon reflects the problem of communication and cognition between husband and wife in ED patients.

As for couples with these risk factors, we cannot focus only on the oral medication which only restores the penile erectile function.

More importantly, we must combine the sexual counseling and sexual knowledge education with the drug treatment.

When the two treatments are tightly integrated, not only the penile erection but also the gap of couples can be restored which is the best result of the ED treatment.