A Survey of Patients with Inflatable Penile Prostheses for Patient Satisfaction

The subjects consisted of 330 patients selected by stratified, systematic random sampling from among 1,298 subjects undergoing virgin 3-piece inflatable penile implant surgeries performed by the same surgical team at 1 hospital between January 1992 and December 1998. Data were collected by computer assisted telephone interviewing with a survey developed by the authors. The survey consisted of 37 questions in 7 sections, including 1 demographic section and 6 patient satisfaction sections.

Abstract: 

Purpose:

We assessed patient satisfaction with 3 types of penile prostheses, namely the AMS 700 Series®, Mentor Alpha 1® and Mentor Alpha NB®.

Materials and Methods:

The subjects consisted of 330 patients selected by stratified, systematic random sampling from among 1,298 subjects undergoing virgin 3-piece inflatable penile implant surgeries performed by the same surgical team at 1 hospital between January 1992 and December 1998. Data were collected by computer assisted telephone interviewing with a survey developed by the authors. The survey consisted of 37 questions in 7 sections, including 1 demographic section and 6 patient satisfaction sections.

Results:

Of the 330 patients selected 248 (75%) could be contacted. Of these, 199 (80%) responded to the full survey and the remaining 49 (20%) agreed to respond only to the question, “How satisfied are you with the prosthesis?” Of the 199 full responders 12 (6%) had AMS implants and 187 (94%) had Mentor implants. Of the 49 single question responders 5 (10%) had AMS implants and 44 (90%) had Mentor implants. Of the 248 patients the overall satisfaction rate was 69%. Although there was no significant difference at the 5% level in patient satisfaction by implant type, responses tended to favor the Alpha IPPs in terms of overall sexual satisfaction (p =0.058), natural feeling of the prosthesis (p =0.061), flaccid appearance of the penis when deflated (p =0.054), and education with demonstration of inflation and deflation (p =0.075).

Conclusions:

There was a high degree of overall patient satisfaction across implant types.

Key Words::

treatment outcome, penile prosthesis, impotence

This publication has been peer reviewed.
Publication Type: 
Journal Article
Authors: 
Mary Jo Brinkman, PhD
Gerard D. Henry, MD
Steven K. Wilson, MD
John R. Delk, II, MD
George A. Denny, PhD
Michael Young, PhD
Mario A. Cleves, PhD
Year of Publication: 
2005
Journal, Book, Magazine or Other Publication Title: 
The Journal of Urology
Volume: 
174
Issue: 
1
Edition: 
1
Section: 
1
Pages: 
253-257
Publisher: 
Elsevier Inc.
Date Published: 
Friday, July 8, 2005
Place Published: 
Elsevier Inc.
Publication Language: 
English
ISSN Number: 
DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000161608.21337.8d
ISBN Number: 
DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000161608.21337.8d
DOI: 
DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000161608.21337.8d
Accession Number: 
DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000161608.21337.8d
Call Number: 
DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000161608.21337.8d
Editors: 
American Urological Association
Boyer's Domain: 
Associated Awards: 
None