| Literature DB >> 33883841 |
Adamu Rislanu1, Hassan Auwal2, Danazumi Musa3, Abdulahi Auwal4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Electrical stimulation and aerobic exercise have been indicated to be beneficial in the management of erectile dysfunction individually. However, there is a scarcity of evidence comparing the two treatment approaches. This study investigated the effects of Electrical Stimulation (ES) compared with Eerobic Exercise (AE) in the management of individuals with Erectile Dysfunction (ED).Entities:
Keywords: Aerobic exercise; Electrical stimulation; Erectile dysfunction; International Index of Erectile Function
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33883841 PMCID: PMC8047238 DOI: 10.4314/ejhs.v30i6.14
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ethiop J Health Sci ISSN: 1029-1857
Figure 1Experimental flow chart
Demographic and Clinical Parameters of the Participants at Baseline
| Groups | Age | Weight (kg) | Height(m) | BMI (kg/m2) | IIEF-5 Scores |
| Mean (SD) | Mean (SD) | Mean (SD) | Mean (SD) | Mean (SD) | |
| Group A (N=15) | 39.83 (7.65) | 75.67 (18.71) | 1.65 (0.06) | 27.62 (5.90) | 11.17 (1.72) |
| Group B (N=15) | 38.50 (5.00) | 84.00 (17.32) | 1.62 (0.83) | 32.24 (8.98) | 10.67 (1.63) |
| 0.067 | 0.597 | 0.871 | 0.075 | 0.063 |
N = Number of participants; SD = Standard Deviation; Group A= Electrical stimulation; Group B= Aerobic exercise; BMI= body mass index; IIEF-5=International Index of Erectile Function
Comparison of Pre- and Post-intervention IIEF-5 Scores for within Group Differences
| Variables | Pre-Intervention | Post-Intervention | t-value | p-value | |
| Mean (SD) | Mean (SD) | ||||
| IIEF-5 score | Group A | 11.17 (1.72) | 20.83 (1.83) | -29.00 | 0.001 |
| Group B | 10.67 (1.63) | 14.33 (2.07) | -6.33 | 0.001 |
Significance at p-value<0.05
Group A= Electrical stimulation; Group B= Aerobic exercise; IIEF-5=International Index of Erectile Function