Do candidates for penile implant prefer their doctors or another implanted patient as their information source? Results of a pilot study.

INTRODUCTION

Erectile dysfunction incidence is about 19-26 cases for every 1000 men/year, requiring about 20,000 penile implants/year. There is high demand for information on the part of patients, however, there is a lack of evidence about the sources of information prior to penile implant and the figure of the Expert Patient (EP) has never been described in this area.

AIMS: To evaluate the sources of information used by candidates for penile implant as well as to describe the role of the EP as an information source.

METHODS

Pilot study of candidates for penile prosthesis. Patients already implanted attending for exchange or reallocation surgery were excluded. Each patient had an interview with an EP, and commercial documentation was given. Each source of information was evaluated in a face-to-face interview. SPSS™ version 20.0 was used.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The EP was evaluated by the International Index of Erectile Function, the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7 questionnaire, and the Erectile Dysfunction Inventory of Treatment Satisfaction. Each source of information was evaluated by a non-validated 6-section questionnaire.

RESULTS

Ten patients were included. Mean age was 60±10.3 years. Medical interview with the urologist resulted in a global value and truthfulness score of 9.2±.9 and 9.8±.4, respectively. Commercial information had a global score of 8.5±.9 and a truthfulness score of 8.6±.6, while the internet had 6.8±.8 points for global value and 7.2±1 for truthfulness. The global score of the EP was 8.7±1.2 points and their veracity scored 9.6±.5 points.

CONCLUSIONS

The urologist remains the main source of information for patients with erectile dysfunction candidates for penile prosthesis implant. However, the EP is an alternative and could be a key pillar in presurgical counselling.