Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31585974›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2019

Management of erectile dysfunction after prostate cancer treatment: cross-sectional surveys of the perceptions and experiences of patients and healthcare professionals in the UK.

Amy Dyer, Mike Kirby, Isabel D White, Alison Michelle Cooper

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Best Patient Care Practices for Administering PSMA-Targeted Radiopharmaceutical Therapy.Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2024
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Amy DyerKnowledge Team, Prostate Cancer UK, London, UK.
Mike KirbyThe Centre for Research in Primary and Community Care, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, Hertfordshire, UK.
Isabel D WhiteDepartment of Pastoral and Psychological Care, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Alison Michelle CooperKnowledge Team, Prostate Cancer UK, London, UK knowledge@prostatecanceruk.org.ORCID 0000-0002-0815-0084
Prostate Cancer UK · GBRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Hertfordshire · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesErectile dysfunction (ED) is known to be a common consequence of radical treatment for prostate cancer (PCa) but is often under-reported and undertreated. This study aimed to explore how ED in patients with PCa is managed in real-life clinical practice, from the perspective of patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs). DESIGN AND

settingThis is a UK-wide cross-sectional survey of men with ED after treatment for PCa which covered assessment and discussion of erectile function, provision of supportive care and satisfaction with management. Parallel surveys of primary and secondary HCPs were also conducted.

resultsResponses were received from 546 men with ED after PCa treatment, 167 primary (general practitioners and practice nurses) and 94 secondary care HCPs (urologists and urology clinical nurse specialists). Survey findings revealed inadequate management of ED in primary care, particularly underprescribing of effective management options. A fifth of men (21%) were not offered any ED management, and a similar proportion (23%) were not satisfied with the way HCPs addressed their ED concerns. There was poor communication between HCPs and men, including failure to initiate discussions about ED and/or involve partners, with 12% of men not told that ED was a risk factor of PCa treatment. These issues seemed to reflect poor access to effective ED management or services and lack of primary HCP confidence in managing ED, as well as confusion over the roles and responsibilities among both HCPs and men.

conclusionsThis study confirms the need for better support for men from HCPs and more tailored and timely access to effective ED management after treatment for PCa. A clearly defined pathway is required for the discussion and management of ED, starting from the planning stage of PCa treatment. Improved adherence to ED management guidelines and better education and training for primary care HCPs are areas of priority.

Indexed as

Patient SatisfactionPractice Patterns, Nurses'Practice Patterns, Physicians'AgedAged, 80 and overClinical CompetenceCommunicationCross-Sectional StudiesErectile DysfunctionGeneral PractitionersHealth Care SurveysHealth Services AccessibilityHumansMaleMiddle AgedNurse Clinicianserectile dysfunctionhealth services administration & managementsexual dysfunctionsexual medicineurological tumours

Identifiers

PMID31585974
PMCPMC6797309
OpenAlexW2977632599

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.