• B Davis-Joseph, L Tiefer, and A Melman.
• Department of Urology, Montefiore Medical Center/Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York.
• Urology. 1995 Mar 1; 45 (3): 498-502.

ObjectivesBecause of its implications for possible therapy, the ability to establish a diagnosis of erectile dysfunction (ED) solely on the basis of history and physical examination has been a matter of controversy. The determination of the etiology of ED based on history and physical examination is evaluated in this present study.MethodsConsecutive patients presenting for evaluation of ED were evaluated by careful history, physical examination, psychologic evaluation, and RigiScan monitoring. They were then stratified into either organic or psychogenic groups based on each of these modalities. These diagnoses were then compared to a final diagnosis obtained through additional testing.ResultsHistory and physical examination had a 95% sensitivity but only a 50% specificity in diagnosing organic ED. The accuracy rates of history and physical examination in diagnosing ED were 80% and 60%, respectively.ConclusionsA multifaceted comprehensive approach is required to evaluate fully and to diagnose ED.

15 keywords...

hide…