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:

Does vibration offer any advantage over visual stimulation studies (VSS) in the assessment of erectile capacity?

International Journal of Impotence Research volume 13, pages 329–337 (2001)Cite this article

Abstract

The purpose of this work was to determine whether vibration stimulation or erotic videotape material can provide an acceptable diagnostic yield for patients with erectile dysfunction (ED) without the patient needing to endure more explicit erotic films, which may be distasteful to some patients, or intracavernous injections, to which there may be a high inhibitory response. Ninety-five subjects were randomly exposed to either vibration or videotape alone and erectile response monitored by the RigiScan. Where no clinical response was recorded by the RigiScan or by self-report by the patient, both stimuli were presented to the subject. Forty-nine subjects received vibration first and 46 received videotape first. Use of clinically based standardised measures revealed neither group achieving above threshold responses to the first stimulation and there were no differences between the two groups. Eight subjects (8%) between both groups exceeded the tip threshold during combination stimulation. Single stimulation with vibration or erotic videotape with provocative RigiScan monitoring is unhelpful in the assessment of ED in any of the diagnostic subgroups of ED. In comparison to previous provocative studies, combination of stimuli sets, whilst increasing penile response (circumferential change and rigidity) did not lead to significant evidence of clinically relevant responses using current RigiScan measures or patient self-report of change. Further studies are necessary to determine the most useful set of stimuli for provocation studies with the RigiScan.

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

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Wagner G. . Penile erection provoked by vibration and intracorporeal injection. Nord Sex 1985 3, 113–118.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Lemaire A, Buvate J, Marcolin G, Buvat-Herbaut M. . Vibration as a diagnostic tool in erectile impotence. Prague: Second World Meeting on Impotence 1986.

  3. Gordon CM, Carey MP. . Penile tumescence monitored during morning naps to assess male erectile functioning: an initial study of healthy men of varied ages. Arch Sex Behav 1995 24, 291–307.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Giesbers AAGM, Bruins JL, Kramer AEJL, Jonas U. . New methods in the diagnosis of impotence: RigiScan, penile tumescence and rigidity monitoring a diagnostic papaverine hydrochloride injection. World J Urol 1987 5, 173–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bancroft J, Smith G, Munoz M, Ronald P. . Erectile response to visual erotic stimuli before and after ICI papaverine. Br J Urol 1991 68, 629–638.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Boolell M et al. Sildenafil: an orally active type 5 cyclic GMP-specific phosphodiesterase inhibitor for the treatment of penile erectile dysfunction. Int J Impot Res 1996 8, 47–52.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Wylie KR. . Use of erotic videos for assessment of sexual functioning. Sex Marital Ther 1996 11, 353–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Opsomer RJ, Wee FX, Van Change PJ. . Visual sexual stimulation plethysmography. Urology 1990 35, 504–507.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Slob AK et al. Routine psycho physiological screening of 384 men with erectile dysfunction. J Sex Marital Ther 1998 24, 273–279.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Slob AK, Coning S, Dohle GR, van der Werff ten Bosch JJ. . The efficacy of papaverine plus phentolamine and prostaglandin E1 compared in psycho physiological diagnostic screening. Scand J Sex 1999 2, 73–77.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Montorsi F et al. The effect of intracorporeal injection plus genital and audiovisual sexual stimulation vs second injection on penile colour Doppler sonography parameters. J Urol 1996 155, 536–540.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Vruggink PA, Diemont WL, Debruyne FM, Meuleman EJ. . Enhanced pharmacological testing in patients with erectile dysfunction. J Andrology 1995 16, 163–168.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Katlowitz NM, Albano GJT, Morales P, Golimbu M. . Potentiation of drug induced erection with audiovisual sexual stimulation. Urology 1993 41, 431–434.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Schiavi RC. . Laboratory methods for evaluating erectile dysfunction. In: Rosen RC, Leiblum SR, (eds). Erectile Disorder: Assessment and Treatment. Guildford Press: New York 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Janssen E, Everaerd W, van Lunsen RHW, Oerlemans S. . Visual stimulation facilitates penile responses to vibration in men with and without erectile disorder. J Clin Consulting Psychol 1994 62, 1222–1228.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Van Neeten J, Verheyden B, Van Camp K. . Role of penile nocturnal tumescence and rigidity measurement in the diagnosis of erectile impotence. Euro Urol 1992 22, 119–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Hatzimouratidis K et al. NPTR: reproducibility and the effect of sexual intercourse in young health volunteers. Int J Impot Res 1996 8, 166 (abstract D176).

    Google Scholar 

  18. Sohn MH, Seeger V, Sikora R, Jakse G. . Criteria for examiner-independen nocturnal penile tumescence and rigidity monitoring (NPTR): correlation's to invasive diagnostic methods. Int J Impot Res 1993 5, 59–68.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Montosori F et al. Genital plus audiovisual sexual stimulation following intracavernous vasoactive injection versus redosing for erectile dysfunction—results of a prospective study. J Urol 1998 159, 113–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Roland DL, Cooper SE & Slob AK. . Genital and psycho-affective response to erotic stimulation in sexually functional and dysfunctional men. J Abnorm Psychol 1996 105, 194–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Koukounas E, McCabe M. . Sexual and emotional variables influencing sexual response to erotica. Behav Res Ther 1997 35, 221–231.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Murnen SK, Stockton M. . Gender and self-reported sexual arousal in response to sexual stimuli: a meta-analytic review. Sex Roles 1997 37, 135–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kelley K, Byrne D, Greendlinger V, Murnen SK. . Content sex of viewer, and dispositional variables as predictors of effective and evaluative responses to sexual explicit films. J Psychol Human Sexuality 1997 9, 53–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Rowland DL, Slob AK. . Vibrotactile stimulation enhances sexual response in sexually functional men. Arch Sex Behav 1992 21, 387–400.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Rowland DL, den Ouden AH, Slob AK. . The use of vibrotactile stimulation for determining sexual potency in the laboratory in men with erectile problems. Int J Impot Res 1994 6, 153–161.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Wylie KR, Hallam-Jones R, Perrett A. . Some of the potential implications of integrated assessment for male erectile disorder. Sex Mar Ther 1999 14, 359–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge the advice and contribution from Chris Todd, Research Assistant, Community Health Sheffield.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Porterbrook Clinic, 75 Osborne Road, Sheffield, UK

    KR Wylie & D Steward

  2. Department of Urology, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Glossop Road, Sheffield, UK

    KR Wylie

  3. ScHARR, Regent Court, 30 Regent Street, Sheffield, UK

    SJ Walters

Authors
  1. KR Wylie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. D Steward
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. SJ Walters
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to KR Wylie.

Appendix: Patient videoscreen message

Appendix: Patient videoscreen message

You are about to either experience vibration applied to the under surface of your penis or see an erotic video. The test lasts for about 15 min. If no response is obtained you will have vibration applied to the under surface of your penis and asked to watch an erotic video. The vibration or video is designed to be a pleasant experience, so feel free to respond in any way that you like. You may respond sexually if you want—to feel warm, to get an erection or anything else. However you react is fine, but we do ask that you do not stimulate your penis with your hand. You can experience the vibration from the stimulator when advised. If you do not get an erection, that is also fine—it is totally normal. We ask that you enjoy whatever physical or sexual sensations you may have.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wylie, K., Steward, D. & Walters, S. Does vibration offer any advantage over visual stimulation studies (VSS) in the assessment of erectile capacity?. Int J Impot Res 13, 329–337 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ijir.3900781

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ijir.3900781

Keywords

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links