ArticleSexual medicine2017
Low-Intensity Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy in Sexual Medicine: A Questionnaire-Based Assessment of Knowledge, Clinical Practice Patterns, and Attitudes in Sexual Medicine Practitioners.
Article in Sexual medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Clinical studies on low intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy for erectile dysfunction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.International journal of impotence research · 2019Pooled it
- The Role of Different Modalities of Regenerative Therapies in the Treatment of Erectile Dysfunction: A Global Survey and Global Andrology Forum Expert Recommendations.The world journal of men's health · 2025Article
- Regenerative Therapy in Erectile Dysfunction: A Survey on Current Global Practice Trends and GAF Expert Recommendations.The world journal of men's health · 2025Article
- Low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy among urologist practitioners: how the opinion of urologists changed between 2016 and 2019.International journal of impotence research · 2022Article
- Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy Salvages Critical Limb Ischemia in B6 Mice through Upregulating Cell Proliferation Signaling and Angiogenesis.Biomedicines · 2022Article
- Low-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy among urologist practitioners: how the opinion of urologists changed between 2016 and 2019.International journal of impotence research · 2020Article
- Is low-intensity shockwave therapy for erectile dysfunction ready for clinical practice?International journal of impotence research · 2019Article
- Therapeutic areas of Li-ESWT in sexual medicine other than erectile dysfunction.International journal of impotence research · 2019Review
- Effect of Linear Low-Intensity Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy for Erectile Dysfunction-12-Month Follow-Up of a Randomized, Double-Blinded, Sham-Controlled Study.Sexual medicine · 2018Article
- Efficient Promotion of Autophagy and Angiogenesis Using Mesenchymal Stem Cell Therapy Enhanced by the Low-Energy Shock Waves in the Treatment of Erectile Dysfunction.Stem cells international · 2018Article
- Efficacy and safety of low-intensity shockwave therapy plus tadalafil 5 mg once daily in men with type 2 diabetes mellitus and erectile dysfunction: a matched-pair comparison study.Asian journal of andrologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLow-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy (LI-ESWT) has emerged as a treatment option for male sexual dysfunction. However, results have been contradictory.
aimTo investigate the knowledge, practice patterns, and attitudes regarding LI-ESWT among experts in sexual medicine.
methodsA study-specific questionnaire was handed out at the 18th Congress for the European Society for Sexual Medicine. Participants were queried on their knowledge about LI-ESWT and about their use of the equipment.
main outcome measuresDescriptive data on the knowledge of LI-ESWT and perception of treatment effects.
resultsOne hundred ninety-two questionnaires were available for analysis. Most respondents were physicians (79.7%) and most of these specialized in urology (58.9%). Overall, 144 of 192 (75%) reported that they were familiar with LI-ESWT in sexual medicine. Twenty-seven (14.1%) had performed the treatment. Of the 117 non-users who were familiar with LI-ESWT, 37 sometimes referred patients for the treatment. Nevertheless, 103 of 144 (71.5%) stated that they considered LI-ESWT an effective treatment for erectile dysfunction (ED) and 10 of 144 (6.9%) considered it an effective treatment for Peyronie disease. Of participants who regarded LI-ESWT an effective ED treatment, 91.2% would consider the treatment specifically for vasculogenic ED and 81.6% would combine it with phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors. Most participants (83.7%) regarded LI-ESWT as safe. A urology background (odds ratio = 2.4; 95% CI = 1.3-4.8; P = .0093) and working in a private setting (odds ratio = 2.8; 95% CI = 1.5-5.3; P = .0084) were significant predictors of familiarity with LI-ESWT in sexual medicine and of being an LI-ESWT user. Likewise, urologists were significantly more likely than non-urologists to consider the treatment effective (odds ratio = 2.8; 95% CI = 1.1-7.1; P = .033).
conclusionLI-ESWT is well known among experts in sexual medicine and the treatment is perceived as safe and effective against vasculogenic ED when combined with phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors. The treatment is mainly offered by urologists. Fode M, Lowenstein L, Reisman Y. Low-Intensity Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy in Sexual Medicine: A Questionnaire-Based Assessment of Knowledge, Clinical Practice Patterns, and Attitudes in Sexual Medicine Practitioners. Sex Med 2017;5:e94-e98.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.