| Literature DB >> 35330893 |
T O Akande1, O M Akinwunmi2, S A Adebayo3, A O Akinyinka2, O B Shittu3.
Abstract
Background: Low Intensity Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy (LI-SWT) has been found to be effective in men with vascular erectile dysfunction (ED) but its efficacy and safety has not been investigated in a predominantly black population so we sought to study this. Materials andEntities:
Keywords: Efficacy; Erectile dysfunction; Extracorporeal shockwave therapy; Nigeria.
Year: 2021 PMID: 35330893 PMCID: PMC8935676
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann Ib Postgrad Med
Socio-demographic characteristics n=30.
| Variables | Frequency | Percentage(s) | Mean (SD) |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Age | |||
| 36-45 | 5 | 16.7 | 53.73+8.013 |
| 46-55 | 13 | 43.3 | |
| 56-65 | 12 | 40.0 | |
| Educational status | |||
| Primary | 7 | 23.3 | |
| Secondary | 8 | 26.7 | |
| Tertiary | 15 | 50.0 | |
| Occupation | |||
| Government employee | 2 | 6.7 | |
| Non-government | 2 | 6.7 | |
| Self-employed | 18 | 60.0 | |
| Retired | 6 | 20.0 | |
| Unemployed | 2 | 6.7 | |
| Tribe | |||
| Yoruba | 27 | 90.0 | |
| Hausa | 1 | 3.3 | |
| Igbo | 0 | 0.0 | |
| Others | 2 | 6.7 | |
| Religion | |||
| Christianity | 18 | 60.0 | |
| Islam | 12 | 40.0 | |
| Marital Status | |||
| Single | 1 | 3.3 | |
| Married | 28 | 93.4 | |
| Separated | 1 | 3.3 | |
| Divorced | 0 | 0.0 | |
| Widowed | 0 | 0.0 | |
| Smoking history | |||
| Non smoker | 20 | 66.7 | |
| Ex-smoker | 10 | 33.3 | |
| Occasionally smokes | 0 | 0 | |
| Smokes regularly | 0 | 0 | |
| Alcohol ingestion | |||
| Does not drink alcohol | 6 | 20.0 | |
| Drank alcohol regularly in the past | 13 | 43.3 | |
| Drinks alcohol occasionally | 6 | 20.0 | |
| Drinks alcohol regularly | 5 | 16.7 | |
First IIEF Score (Before Treatment).
N=30
| Level of ED | Frequency | Percentage(s) | Mean (SD) IIEF1 |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| No ED (22-25) | 0 | 0.0 |
|
| Mild ED (17-21) | 0 | 0.0 | |
| Mild Moderate ED (12-16) | 2 | 6.7 | |
| Moderate ED (8-11) | 16 | 53.3 | |
| Severe ED (1-7) | 12 | 40.0 | |
|
| 30 | 100 | |
Summary of respondents age, cardiovascular risk factors and IIEF scores.
| Cardio vascular risk factors | IIEF1 (Baseline) | IIEF2 (After 6 treatments) | IIEF3 (After 12 treatments **(Treatment completion) | IIEF4 (At 1month) | IIEF5 (At 6months |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| D | 8 | 13 | 22 | 8 | 8 |
| D | 5 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 5 |
| D+H | 11 | 20 | 24 | 20 | 21 |
| D+H | 10 | 24 | 24 | 20 | 20 |
| H | 12 | 19 | 20 | 13 | 12 |
| H | 10 | 17 | 24 | 24 | 25 |
| D | 7 | 15 | 23 | 11 | 11 |
| D | 5 | 10 | 20 | 16 | 18 |
| H | 8 | 22 | 24 | 10 | 19 |
| D+H | 6 | 18 | 24 | 16 | 11 |
| D+H | 8 | 13 | 13 | 13 | 13 |
| D | 6 | 20 | 21 | 6 | 6 |
| D+H | 5 | 7 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
| H | 7 | 16 | 22 | 6 | 5 |
| D+H | 9 | 14 | 14 | 13 | 14 |
| D | 11 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 18 |
| H | 11 | 11 | - | - | - |
| D+H | 5 | 5 | - | - | - |
| H | 10 | 11 | 15 | 15 | 17 |
| H | 8 | 16 | - | - | - |
| H | 5 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 16 |
| H | 5 | 5 | - | - | - |
| H | 11 | 20 | 24 | 25 | 25 |
| D | 5 | 9 | - | - | - |
| D | 16 | 20 | - | - | - |
| H | 10 | - | - | - | - |
| H | 8 | 22 | 23 | 23 | 22 |
| H | 9 | 21 | 25 | 25 | 25 |
| D | 11 | 11 | - | - | - |
| H | 6 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 5 |
Note: *22 respondents in total completed the treatment and were followed up
* No of cardio vascular risk factors – H – Hypertension, D – Diabetes, D+H – Diabetes and Hypertension
*Px: Patient
Third IIEF score (after 12 treatments) N=22.
| Level of ED | Frequency | Percentage(s) | Mean (SD) IIEF3 |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| No ED (22-25) | 11 | 50.0 | 13.73±9.944 |
| Mild ED (17-21) | 3 | 13.6 | |
| Mild Moderate ED (12-16) | 5 | 22.7 | |
| Moderate ED (8-11) | 1 | 4.6 | |
| Severe ED (1-7) | 2 | 9.1 | |
| Total | 22 | 100 | |
Fifth IIEF score (6 month after treatment completion) N=22.
| Level of ED | Frequency | Percentage(s) | Mean (SD) IIEF5 |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| No ED (22-25) | 4 | 18.2 |
|
| Mild ED (17-21) | 6 | 27.3 | |
| Mild Moderate ED (12-16) | 4 | 18.2 | |
| Moderate ED (8-11) | 3 | 13.6 | |
| Severe ED (1-7) | 5 | 22.7 | |
| 22 | 100 | ||
Response to treatment among respondents (IIEF1-IIEF5).
N=22 (respondents that completed the treatments)
| Variable | Frequency | Percentage(s) |
|---|---|---|
|
| ||
| Insignificant improvement | 3 | 13.6 |
| Significant improvement | 19 |
|
|
| 22 | 100.0 |
Significant improvement of ED was estimated based on increase of 5 from IIEF1-IIEF5
Association between severity of ED and response to treatment.
| Severity of ED | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Significant | 1 | 12 | 6 | 5.018 | 0.081 |
| Insignificant | 0 | 0 | 3 | ||
|
| 1 | 12 | 9 | ||