INTRODUCTION: The interrelationship between male and female sexual function suggests that partner outcomes after inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) implantation must be assessed. AIM: We examined predictors of patient and partner satisfaction, and the relationship between patient satisfaction and female sexual function, after IPP implantation. METHODS: We designed a questionnaire (scored 1-5) assessing satisfaction with various domains related to the IPP (e.g., overall satisfaction and satisfaction related to: length, width, ease of use, and partner perception). Scores ≥3 were classified as satisfied. The Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) was administered to the female partners of patients that underwent an IPP. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Independent samples Students' t-test was used to compare various FSFI domain scores in relation to male and female satisfaction. Analysis of variance test was used to assess linear regression correlation between various continuous variables. RESULTS: 45 men and 32 partners with a mean follow-up of 2.2 years were contacted. Overall satisfaction for men and women was 3.60 and 3.62 (out of 5), respectively. Partner FSFI scores were higher, respectively, in men with higher implant satisfaction than those with lower implant satisfaction (25.09 ± 6.79 vs. 13.67 ± 12.70, P < 0.001). Regression analysis suggests a direct correlation between FSFI scores and the degree of patient (r = 0.50, r(2) = 0.23; P = 0.001) and partner (r = 0.70 r(2) = 0.50; P < 0.001) satisfaction with the IPP. CONCLUSION: Patient satisfaction after IPP implantation implies favorable partner sexual function compared to that of unsatisfied patients. The correlation observed suggests that patients not satisfied with their IPP are likely to have female partners at high risk for female sexual dysfunction. Further interventions may be needed to improve patient and partner sexual function, particularly unsatisfied men and their female partners.
INTRODUCTION: The interrelationship between male and female sexual function suggests that partner outcomes after inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) implantation must be assessed. AIM: We examined predictors of patient and partner satisfaction, and the relationship between patient satisfaction and female sexual function, after IPP implantation. METHODS: We designed a questionnaire (scored 1-5) assessing satisfaction with various domains related to the IPP (e.g., overall satisfaction and satisfaction related to: length, width, ease of use, and partner perception). Scores ≥3 were classified as satisfied. The Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) was administered to the female partners of patients that underwent an IPP. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Independent samples Students' t-test was used to compare various FSFI domain scores in relation to male and female satisfaction. Analysis of variance test was used to assess linear regression correlation between various continuous variables. RESULTS: 45 men and 32 partners with a mean follow-up of 2.2 years were contacted. Overall satisfaction for men and women was 3.60 and 3.62 (out of 5), respectively. Partner FSFI scores were higher, respectively, in men with higher implant satisfaction than those with lower implant satisfaction (25.09 ± 6.79 vs. 13.67 ± 12.70, P < 0.001). Regression analysis suggests a direct correlation between FSFI scores and the degree of patient (r = 0.50, r(2) = 0.23; P = 0.001) and partner (r = 0.70 r(2) = 0.50; P < 0.001) satisfaction with the IPP. CONCLUSION:Patient satisfaction after IPP implantation implies favorable partner sexual function compared to that of unsatisfied patients. The correlation observed suggests that patients not satisfied with their IPP are likely to have female partners at high risk for female sexual dysfunction. Further interventions may be needed to improve patient and partner sexual function, particularly unsatisfied men and their female partners.
Authors: F Pisano; M Falcone; A Abbona; M Oderda; F Soria; F Peraldo; F Marson; M Barale; C Fiorito; A Gurioli; B Frea; P Gontero Journal: Int J Impot Res Date: 2015-08-13 Impact factor: 2.896
Authors: John J Mulcahy; Andrew Kramer; William O Brant; Justin L Parker; Paul E Perito; Jeremy B Myers; Richard Bryson; Meagan Dunne Journal: Curr Urol Rep Date: 2014-06 Impact factor: 3.092
Authors: G Antonini; G M Busetto; E De Berardinis; R Giovannone; P Vicini; F Del Giudice; S L Conti; V Gentile; P E Perito Journal: Int J Impot Res Date: 2015-12-10 Impact factor: 2.896