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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rislanu, Adamu, Auwal, Hassan, Musa, Danazumi, Auwal, Abdulahi
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