Evidence Hub

Double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of sildenafil in phallometric testing

Kolla NJ, Klassen PE, Kuban ME, Blak T, Blanchard R

The journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 2010

Abstract

Not all males undergoing phallometric testing for assessment of deviant sexual interests respond adequately to test stimuli. As poor response may be linked to hormonal, neurologic, vascular, or psychogenic causes, we studied the ability of sildenafil, an effective proerectile agent, to increase penile blood flow during phallometric testing. Twenty-two males completed this double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of sildenafil (100 mg). Each participant underwent phallometric testing with and without sildenafil. On average, each subject's peak response was 50 percent greater in the sildenafil condition than it was in the placebo condition (p < .05). Correlations between participants' penile response to human stimulus categories, with or without treatment, were all very high (r = 0.77-0.89) and statistically significant, thus indicating excellent reliability between the two test conditions. These results support earlier findings that sildenafil significantly increases phallometric response among middle-aged males. Moreover, pharmacologic treatment did not compromise the reliability of phallometric diagnosis.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free