ArticleCanadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada2021
Access to penile prostheses differ across provinces in Canada: A survey of Canadian urologists.
Article in Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cost Considerations in Penile Implant Surgery from a Global Perspective.Current urology reports · 2026Review
- Cost Considerations in Penile Implantation Revision Surgery from a Global Perspective.Current urology reports · 2026Review
- Practice patterns of Canadian penile prosthesis implanters A survey-based analysis.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSurgical implantation of a penile prosthesis is the gold standard treatment for refractory erectile dysfunction. The purpose of this study was to investigate the use of and access to these procedures in Canada.
methodsCanadian urologists known to perform penile prostheses procedures were surveyed on areas such as surgical volume, type of device used, and the direct cost to patients for both malleable and inflatable devices.
resultsOf the 50 urologists invited to participate in the study, 34 (68%) completed the online survey. Participants represented nine Canadian provinces and included a mix of academic (65%) and community (35%) urologists. Most participants (79%) performed less than 10 procedures per year. Roughly three-quarters of participants (74%) used inflatable devices in over 90% of cases, while half implanted inflatable devices exclusively. The most common devices implanted were American Medical Systems (AMS). Participants from Alberta, Manitoba, New Brunswick, and Newfoundland reported full coverage for both malleable and inflatable devices. Saskatchewan was the only province where no coverage was reported. The remaining provinces were found to have variable degrees of coverage. Across all centers without full coverage, the median reported cost to patients for a malleable and inflatable device was $5000 and $6000, respectively.
conclusionsThe urologists surveyed most commonly perform inflatable penile prostheses procedures. Significant geographical differences exist with respect to reported coverage for these procedures. This study highlights the need for continued advocacy on behalf of the urological community towards the goal of equity in coverage for penile prostheses across Canada.
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.