Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Paper
  • Published:

Malaysian cultural differences in knowledge, attitudes and practices related to erectile dysfunction: focus group discussions

Abstract

This qualitative study aimed to examine cultural differences in knowledge, attitudes and practices related to erectile dysfunction (ED) utilizing focus group discussion. Six focus groups consisting of 66 men, 45–70-y-old were conducted—two Malay groups (n=18), two Chinese groups (n=25) and two Indian groups (n=23). Participants were purposively recruited from the general public on a voluntary basis with informed consent. Transcripts were analyzed using qualitative data analysis software ATLASti. The Malay and Chinese traditional remedies for preventing or treating ED are commonly recognized among all races. Many have a negative perception of someone with ED. Malay and Chinese men tended to blame their wife for their problem and thought that the problem might lead to extra-marital affairs, unlike the Indian men who attributed their condition to fate. Malays would prefer traditional medicine for the problem. The Chinese felt they would be more comfortable with a male doctor whilst this is not so with the Malays or Indians. Almost all prefer the doctor to initiate discussion on sexual issues related to their medical condition. There is a need for doctors to consider cultural perspectives in a multicultural society as a lack of understanding of this often contributes to an inadequate consultation.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Morley JE . Impotence JAMA 1986; 80: 897–905.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Linet OI, Ogrinc FG . Efficacy and safety of intracavernosal alprostadil in men with erectile dysfunction New Engl J Med 1996; 334: 873–877.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Aytac IA et al. Socioeconomic factors and incidence of erectile dysfunction: findings of the longitudinal Massachussetts Male Aging Study Soc Sci Med 2000; 51: 771–778.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Moskowitz MA . The challenges of diagnosing erectile dysfunction in the primary care setting Nurse Pract 2000; 48: 1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Morgentaler A . Male impotence Lancet 1999; 354: 1713–1718.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Feldman HA et al. Impotence and its medical and psychosocial correlates: results of the Massachusetts male aging study J Urol 1994; 151: 54–61.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Malaysian Medical Tribune (MMT). Prevalence and correlates of ED in Malaysia 15th June 1999.

  8. Kitzinger J . Introducing focus groups Br Med J 1995; 311: 299–302.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Murray S et al. Listening to local voices: adapting rapid appraisal to assess health and social needs in general practice Br Med J 1994; 308: 698–700.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Gregory S, McKie L . The smear test: listening to women's views Nurs Standard 1991; 5: 32–36.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Morgan DL . Focus groups as qualitative research London: Sage 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Muhr T . ATLASti. For qualitative data analysis Berlin: Scientific Software Development 1997.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to W Y Low.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Low, W., Wong, Y., Zulkifli, S. et al. Malaysian cultural differences in knowledge, attitudes and practices related to erectile dysfunction: focus group discussions. Int J Impot Res 14, 440–445 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ijir.3900837

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ijir.3900837

Keywords

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links