Under-recognized factors affecting penile implant satisfaction in patients.
Journal
Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada
ISSN: 1911-6470
Titre abrégé: Can Urol Assoc J
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 101312644
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2022
Aug 2022
Historique:
pubmed:
19
3
2022
medline:
19
3
2022
entrez:
18
3
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Surgical management via penile prosthesis is an option for patients who have failed medical management. There is a paucity of literature surrounding factors contributing to patient satisfaction after implant surgery. The objective of this study was to characterize patients' and surgeons' attitudes toward factors affecting satisfaction with this procedure. Two patient cohorts were identified and contacted via email: a medical management of erectile dysfunction (ED) cohort and a penile implant patient cohort. A third cohort, Canadian urologists who perform penile implant surgeries, was also contacted. The surveys consisted of 5-7 questions, including a rating question regarding the importance of various penile implant factors. Forty-six ED patients, 45 post-implant patients, and 12 urologists completed the survey. The mean overall satisfaction on a 10-point scale was 6.49 (standard deviation [SD] 2.92). Most (67%) urologists selected patient satisfaction as one of their least favorite aspects of penile implant surgery. Compared to postimplant patients, ED patients reported greater importance in the areas of appearance (p=0.035), soft glans (p=0.040), and concealment of implant (p=0.007). Urologists ranked natural feel (p=0.019) and generating a discrete erection (p=0.022) as less important than patients. This is the first study that examines which specific variables of penile implant surgery are associated with satisfaction while comparing surgeons' understanding of what patients desire from this surgery. This study identifies several factors deemed important by patients but under-recognized by urologists. This knowledge can aid urologists in optimizing preoperative counselling and improving patient satisfaction.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35302472
pii: cuaj.7720
doi: 10.5489/cuaj.7720
pmc: PMC9343162
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
294-300Références
Adv Urol. 2012;2012:707321
pubmed: 22899909
Int Braz J Urol. 2015 May-Jun;41(3):535-41
pubmed: 26200547
J Sex Med. 2020 May;17(5):861-869
pubmed: 32273243
Urol Clin North Am. 2005 Nov;32(4):503-9, vii
pubmed: 16291041
Curr Urol. 2019 Oct;13(2):94-100
pubmed: 31768176
J Sex Med. 2021 Sep;18(9):1641-1651
pubmed: 34373212
J Sex Med. 2014 Oct;11(10):2589-94
pubmed: 25070914
J Sex Med. 2021 May;18(5):868-874
pubmed: 33903044
J Urol. 2003 Jul;170(1):159-63
pubmed: 12796670
Global Spine J. 2021 Apr;11(3):331-337
pubmed: 32875885
Sex Med Rev. 2019 Jan;7(1):178-188
pubmed: 30503794
Int J Impot Res. 2014 Sep-Oct;26(5):167-71
pubmed: 24830674
J Sex Med. 2018 Aug;15(8):1180-1186
pubmed: 30017718
J Sex Med. 2016 Apr;13(4):489-518
pubmed: 27045255
J Sex Med. 2010 Jan;7(1 Pt 1):304-9
pubmed: 19758282
J Sex Med. 2021 Aug;18(8):1320-1327
pubmed: 34247953
J Sex Med. 2013 Apr;10(4):893-906; quiz 907
pubmed: 23551538
J Sex Med. 2013 Nov;10(11):2774-81
pubmed: 24034543
J Sex Med. 2010 Jun;7(6):2261-2266
pubmed: 20367767
J Sex Med. 2010 Jan;7(1 Pt 2):501-23
pubmed: 20092450