Cargando…
Comparative Effectiveness of Electrical Stimulation and Aerobic Exercise in the Management of Erectile Dysfunction: A Randomized Clinical Trial
BACKGROUND: Electrical stimulation and aerobic exercise have been indicated to be beneficial in the management of erectile dysfunction individually. However, there is a scarcity of evidence comparing the two treatment approaches. This study investigated the effects of Electrical Stimulation (ES) com...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Research and Publications Office of Jimma University
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8047238/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33883841 http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/ejhs.v30i6.14 |
_version_ | 1783679007383879680 |
---|---|
author | Rislanu, Adamu Auwal, Hassan Musa, Danazumi Auwal, Abdulahi |
author_facet | Rislanu, Adamu Auwal, Hassan Musa, Danazumi Auwal, Abdulahi |
author_sort | Rislanu, Adamu |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Electrical stimulation and aerobic exercise have been indicated to be beneficial in the management of erectile dysfunction individually. However, there is a scarcity of evidence comparing the two treatment approaches. This study investigated the effects of Electrical Stimulation (ES) compared with Eerobic Exercise (AE) in the management of individuals with Erectile Dysfunction (ED). METHODS: This study was a single-blind parallel randomized clinical trial. Thirty (30) patients diagnosed with ED (Mean age of 39.17 ± 6.21 years) were recruited and randomized into two groups, A and B with 15 participants in each group. Group A received ES while Group B received AE. International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) was used to assess the sexual functions of the participants at baseline and after 6 weeks of intervention. Within-group and between-group differences were analyzed using dependent and independent t-tests respectively. RESULTS: The result indicated a significant difference between groups A and B [20.83 (1.83) Vs 14.33 (2.07), p=0.001] after 6 weeks of intervention. However, the mean effect was significantly higher in the ES group than in the AE group. CONCLUSION: The finding of this study indicated that ES is more effective than AE in the management of individuals with ED. Trial Registration: Pan African Clinical Trial Registry (PACTR201906776769795) |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8047238 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Research and Publications Office of Jimma University |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-80472382021-04-20 Comparative Effectiveness of Electrical Stimulation and Aerobic Exercise in the Management of Erectile Dysfunction: A Randomized Clinical Trial Rislanu, Adamu Auwal, Hassan Musa, Danazumi Auwal, Abdulahi Ethiop J Health Sci Original Article BACKGROUND: Electrical stimulation and aerobic exercise have been indicated to be beneficial in the management of erectile dysfunction individually. However, there is a scarcity of evidence comparing the two treatment approaches. This study investigated the effects of Electrical Stimulation (ES) compared with Eerobic Exercise (AE) in the management of individuals with Erectile Dysfunction (ED). METHODS: This study was a single-blind parallel randomized clinical trial. Thirty (30) patients diagnosed with ED (Mean age of 39.17 ± 6.21 years) were recruited and randomized into two groups, A and B with 15 participants in each group. Group A received ES while Group B received AE. International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) was used to assess the sexual functions of the participants at baseline and after 6 weeks of intervention. Within-group and between-group differences were analyzed using dependent and independent t-tests respectively. RESULTS: The result indicated a significant difference between groups A and B [20.83 (1.83) Vs 14.33 (2.07), p=0.001] after 6 weeks of intervention. However, the mean effect was significantly higher in the ES group than in the AE group. CONCLUSION: The finding of this study indicated that ES is more effective than AE in the management of individuals with ED. Trial Registration: Pan African Clinical Trial Registry (PACTR201906776769795) Research and Publications Office of Jimma University 2020-11 /pmc/articles/PMC8047238/ /pubmed/33883841 http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/ejhs.v30i6.14 Text en © 2020 Danazumi M., et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Rislanu, Adamu Auwal, Hassan Musa, Danazumi Auwal, Abdulahi Comparative Effectiveness of Electrical Stimulation and Aerobic Exercise in the Management of Erectile Dysfunction: A Randomized Clinical Trial |
title | Comparative Effectiveness of Electrical Stimulation and Aerobic Exercise in the Management of Erectile Dysfunction: A Randomized Clinical Trial |
title_full | Comparative Effectiveness of Electrical Stimulation and Aerobic Exercise in the Management of Erectile Dysfunction: A Randomized Clinical Trial |
title_fullStr | Comparative Effectiveness of Electrical Stimulation and Aerobic Exercise in the Management of Erectile Dysfunction: A Randomized Clinical Trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparative Effectiveness of Electrical Stimulation and Aerobic Exercise in the Management of Erectile Dysfunction: A Randomized Clinical Trial |
title_short | Comparative Effectiveness of Electrical Stimulation and Aerobic Exercise in the Management of Erectile Dysfunction: A Randomized Clinical Trial |
title_sort | comparative effectiveness of electrical stimulation and aerobic exercise in the management of erectile dysfunction: a randomized clinical trial |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8047238/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33883841 http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/ejhs.v30i6.14 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT rislanuadamu comparativeeffectivenessofelectricalstimulationandaerobicexerciseinthemanagementoferectiledysfunctionarandomizedclinicaltrial AT auwalhassan comparativeeffectivenessofelectricalstimulationandaerobicexerciseinthemanagementoferectiledysfunctionarandomizedclinicaltrial AT musadanazumi comparativeeffectivenessofelectricalstimulationandaerobicexerciseinthemanagementoferectiledysfunctionarandomizedclinicaltrial AT auwalabdulahi comparativeeffectivenessofelectricalstimulationandaerobicexerciseinthemanagementoferectiledysfunctionarandomizedclinicaltrial |