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.

  • Original Article
  • Published:

Time course and predictors of use of erectile dysfunction treatment in a Veterans Affairs medical center

International Journal of Impotence Research volume 28, pages 167–171 (2016)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

The objective of this study was to define the pattern and time course of use of ED treatments in a Veterans Affairs (VA) medical center and to identify clinical or demographic variables that are associated with the use of second- or third-line ED treatments. We identified 702 men treated for ED at the Greater Los Angeles Veterans Affairs between 2007 and 2013. We extracted demographics, Charlson co-morbidity score, pertinent surgical/medication history as well as use of ED treatments from medical records. On multivariate analysis, age over 65 (OR 1.83, 95% CI: 1.31–2.56) and Charlson co-morbidity score of 1 (OR 1.77, 95% CI: 1.13–2.77) and 2+ (OR 2.07, 95% CI: 1.28–3.36) were significantly associated with use of medicated urethral suppositories for erection (MUSE)/intracorporal injections (ICI) compared with PDE5i/erection devices. Across all men who used second- or third-line treatments, median time until receiving MUSE was 0.6 years and median time until receiving ICI/implant was 2 years. We conclude that men who will ultimately use more invasive ED treatments, such as men with more co-morbidities, tend to have a prolonged treatment course. This information may be incorporated into a shared decision-making model for more efficient treatment of ED.

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

Figure 1
Figure 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Shamloul R, Ghanem H . Erectile dysfunction. Lancet 2013; 381: 153–165.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Litwin MS, Nied RJ, Dhanani N . Health-related quality of life in men with erectile dysfunction. J Gen Intern Med 1998; 13: 159–166.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Smith WB, McCaslin IR, Gokce A, Mandava SH, Trost L, Hellstrom WJ . PDE5 inhibitors: considerations for preference and long-term adherence. Int J Clin Pract 2013; 67: 768–780.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Bernal RM, Henry GD . Contemporary patient satisfaction rates for three-piece inflatable penile prostheses. Adv Urol 2012; 2012: 707321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Segal RL, Camper SB, Burnett AL . Modern utilization of penile prosthesis surgery: a national claim registry analysis. Int J Impot Res 2014; 26: 167–171.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Tal R, Jacks LM, Elkin E, Mulhall JP . Penile implant utilization following treatment for prostate cancer: analysis of the SEER-Medicare database. J Sex Med 2011; 8: 1797–1804.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Walsh TJ, Hotaling JM, Smith A, Saigal C, Wessells H . Men with diabetes may require more aggressive treatment for erectile dysfunction. Int J Impot Res 2013; 26: 112–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, Mackenzie CR . A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 1987; 40: 373–383.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Baniel J, Israilov S, Segenreich E, Livne PM . Comparative evaluation of treatments for erectile dysfunction in patients with prostate cancer after radical retropubic prostatectomy. BJU Int 2001; 88: 58–62.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Prabhu V, Alukal JP, Laze J, Makarov DV, Lepor H . Long-term satisfaction and predictors of use of intracorporeal injections for post-prostatectomy erectile dysfunction. J Urol 2013; 189: 238–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was funded by the UCLA Department of Urology.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, , Los Angeles, CA, USA

    R I Clavijo, T Daskivich, L Kwan & C Bennett

  2. Kaiser Permanente, , Anaheim, CA, USA

    J Bassett

  3. Greater Los Angeles Veterans Affairs Medical Center, , Los Angeles, CA, USA

    T Keller & C Bennett

Authors
  1. R I Clavijo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. T Daskivich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. L Kwan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. J Bassett
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. T Keller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. C Bennett
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C Bennett.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Clavijo, R., Daskivich, T., Kwan, L. et al. Time course and predictors of use of erectile dysfunction treatment in a Veterans Affairs medical center. Int J Impot Res 28, 167–171 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/ijir.2016.20

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ijir.2016.20

Search

Advanced search

Quick links