Evidence Hub

Treatment preferences of patients with erectile dysfunction: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

Celeste Manfredi, Antonio Franco, Francesco Ditonno, Raman Mathur, Giorgio Franco, Riccardo Lombardo, G. Russo, S. De Cillis et al.

Minerva urology and nephrology, 2024

6,841 participants · 13 citations

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Patients' treatment preferences (PTP) depend on the complex interaction of numerous patient- and treatment-related factors; their assessment can guide therapy and promote compliance of patients with erectile dysfunction (ED). We aimed to systematically describe the literature evaluating the treatment preferences of patients with ED, published in the last 25 years.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A comprehensive bibliographic search of multiple databases was conducted in June, 2023. The literature search was limited to the articles published since 1998. Articles were deemed eligible if they described male patients with ED (P) undergoing treatment for this condition (I) compared with other treatments, placebo or sham therapy (C), and reported PTP (O). Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and post-hoc analyses of RCTs were selected (S). The data were presented in a narrative fashion. The risk of bias (RoB) was evaluated using the RoB 2 tool and the Mulhall-Montorsi model.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A total 14 RCTs evaluating 6,841 patients and 4 post-hoc analyses of RCTs were included. All RCTs were considered to be at high RoB. No validated tool was used to investigate PTP. Sildenafil was the most frequently evaluated ED treatment (9 RCTs). Sildenafil was chosen over placebo by 78-100% of subjects and over ICI in 70% of patients due to its easier route of administration. No significant difference in patient preference was recorded between Sildenafil tablets and orodispersible…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 6,841 participants or records.

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