SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Endoüroloji Bülteni / 2026 / Cilt: 18 Sayı: 2

Awareness of Urologists Regarding Partner Education Following Penile Prosthesis Implantation

Penil Protez İmplantasyonu Sonrasında Partner Eğitiminde Üroloji Uzmanlarının Farkındalığı

Ali Erhan Eren(Antalya Training and Research Hospital)0000-0002-4675-4604
Baran Arslan(Antalya Training and Research Hospital)0000-0001-5621-396X
Mehmet Reşat İnal(Antalya Training and Research Hospital)0009-0005-5946-2976
Eren Erdi Aksaray(Kahramanmaraş Devlet Hastanesi)0000-0003-1074-1016
Mehmet Salih Boğa(Antalya Training and Research Hospital)0000-0001-7979-8075
Ekrem İslamoğlu(Antalya Training and Research Hospital)0000-0003-0693-0666
Pages
64–72
Publication Date
2026-05-29
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Institutional protocols and standardized training programs are urgently needed to bridge these gaps in postoperative PPI care.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: This multicenter study aimed to evaluate postoperative partner education practices among Turkish urologists performing penile prosthesis implantation (PPI) and to assess their attitudes toward combined device training and sexual counseling.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Material and Methods: A cross-sectional electronic survey was distributed to 164 urologists across the seven geographical regions of Türkiye, with 84 responses obtained (response rate: 51.2%).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Institutional protocols and standardized training programs are urgently needed to bridge these gaps in postoperative PPI care.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:cerrahi sonrası bakım · cinsel danışmanlık · hasta memnuniyeti

Abstract

Objective: This multicenter study aimed to evaluate postoperative partner education practices among Turkish urologists performing penile prosthesis implantation (PPI) and to assess their attitudes toward combined device training and sexual counseling. Material and Methods: A cross-sectional electronic survey was distributed to 164 urologists across the seven geographical regions of Türkiye, with 84 responses obtained (response rate: 51.2%). The 10-item questionnaire assessed: (i) demographic and procedural characteristics, (ii) current partner education practices, and (iii) discrepancies between beliefs and practices (using 5-point Likert scales). Results: The mean professional experience was 16 years (range: 2–35 years). Significant belief–practice gaps were identified: Device training was considered necessary by 81% of respondents but implemented by only 31% (50.6-point gap), while sexual counseling was considered necessary by 83% but implemented by only 19% (64-point gap). Significant associations were observed for device training (OR = 2.1) and sexual counseling (OR = 3.4). Senior surgeons (>10 years of experience) were 3.2 times more likely to prioritize partner education (OR = 3.2, 95% CI: 1.8–5.7). Conclusion: Although 72% of urologists endorsed partner education as “essential” substantial barriers to implementation remain. Particularly in sexual counseling, only 15% had received formal training. Institutional protocols and standardized training programs are urgently needed to bridge these gaps in postoperative PPI care.

Özet

Özet: Bu çok merkezli çalışmanın amacı, penis protezi implantasyonu (PPI) uygulayan Türk ürologlarının ameliyat sonrası partner eğitimi uygulamalarını değerlendirmek ve cihaz kullanımı ile cinsel danışmanlığı içeren kombine eğitim yaklaşımlarına yönelik tutumlarını incelemektir. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Türkiye’nin yedi coğrafi bölgesindeki 164 üroloğa elektronik ortamda kesitsel bir anket gönderilmiş, 84 yanıt alınmıştır (yanıt oranı: %51,2). On soruluk anket; (i) demografik ve cerrahi özellikleri, (ii) mevcut partner eğitimi uygulamalarını, (iii) inanç-uygulama farklılıklarını (5’li Likert ölçeği) değerlendirmiştir. Bulgular: Katılımcıların ortalama mesleki deneyimi 16 yıl (dağılım: 2–35 yıl) olup, inanç ile uygulama arasında belirgin farklılıklar saptanmıştır. Cihaz eğitimi %81 oranında gerekli görülmesine rağmen yalnızca %31 oranında uygulanmaktadır (50,6 puan fark). Cinsel danışmanlık %83 oranında gerekli görülmesine rağmen yalnızca %19 oranında uygulanmaktadır (64 puan fark). Ayrıca cihaz eğitimi için olasılık oranı 2,1, cinsel danışmanlık için ise 3,4 olarak bulunmuştur. Kıdemli cerrahların (>10 yıl deneyim) partner eğitimine öncelik verme olasılığı 3,2 kat daha yüksek bulunmuştur (OR=3,2; %95 GA: 1,8–5,7). Katılımcıların %69’u anket sonrasında klinik uygulamalarını değiştirmeyi planladığını belirtmiştir. Sonuç: Her ne kadar ürologların %72’si partner eğitimini “olmazsa olmaz” olarak değerlendirse de, uygulamada ciddi engeller mevcuttur. Özellikle cinsel danışmanlık alanında yalnızca %15’inin resmi eğitim almış olması dikkat çekicidir. Penis protezi implantasyonu sonrası bakımda bu boşluğun giderilebilmesi için kurumsal protokoller ve standart eğitim programlarının geliştirilmesi gerekmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Eren, A. E., Arslan, B., İnal, M. R., Aksaray, E. E., Boğa, M. S., İslamoğlu, E. (2026). Awareness of Urologists Regarding Partner Education Following Penile Prosthesis Implantation. Endoüroloji Bülteni, Cilt: 18 Sayı: 2, 64–72. https://doi.org/10.54233/endourolbull-1770797

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (20)

  1. NIH Consensus Conference. Impotence. NIH Consensus Development Panel on Impotence. JAMA. 1993;270(1):83-90.
  2. McCabe MP, Sharlip ID, Lewis R, et al. Incidence and Prevalence of Sexual Dysfunction in Women and Men: A Consensus Statement from the Fourth International Consultation on Sexual Medicine 2015. J Sex Med. 2016;13(2):144-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsxm.2015.12.034
  3. Kessler A, Sollie S, Challacombe B, Briggs K, Van Hemelrijck M. The global prevalence of erectile dysfunction: a review. BJU Int. 2019;124(4):587-99. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.14813
  4. Kaya E, Sikka SC, Kadowitz PJ, Gur S. Aging and sexual health: getting to the problem. Aging Male. 2017;20(2):65-80. https://doi.org/10.1080/13685538.2017.1295435
  5. Seftel AD, Sun P, Swindle R. The prevalence of hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes mellitus and depression in men with erectile dysfunction. J Urol. 2004;171(6 Pt 1):2341-45. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ju.0000125198.32936.38
  6. McMahon CN, Smith CJ, Shabsigh R. Treating erectile dysfunction when PDE5 inhibitors fail. BMJ. 2006;332(7541):589-92. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.332.7541.589
  7. Rodriguez KM, Pastuszak AW. A history of penile implants. Transl Androl Urol. 2017;6(Suppl 5):851-57. https://doi.org/10.21037/tau.2017.04.02
  8. Cheriyan A. Prosthetics in urology: Current status and future directions. Indian J Urol. 2023;39(1):12-20. https://doi.org/10.4103/iju.iju_90_22
  9. Barnard JT, Cakir OO, Ralph D, Yafi FA. Technological Advances in Penile Implant Surgery. J Sex Med. 2021;18(7):1158-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsxm.2021.04.011
  10. Romano L, Arcaniolo D, Spirito L, et al. Comparison of Current International Guidelines on Premature Ejaculation: 2024 Update. Diagnostics. 2024:14;1819. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics14161819
  11. Li H, Gao T, Wang R. The role of the sexual partner in managing erectile dysfunction. Nat Rev Urol. 2016;13(3):168-77. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2015.315
  12. McLaren RH, Barrett DM. Patient and partner satisfaction with the AMS 700 penile prosthesis. J Urol. 1992;147(1):62-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5347(17)37134-3
  13. Dighero I, Naylor K, Looney A, Holden F, Mount C. Quality of life outcomes following penile prosthesis insertion in the post-ischaemic priapism setting. Int J Impot Res. 2025:1-7. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-025-01073-y
  14. Akakpo W, Pineda MA, Burnett AL. Critical analysis of satisfaction assessment after penile prosthesis surgery. Sex Med Rev. 2017;5(2):244-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sxmr.2017.01.001
  15. Barton GJ, Carlos EC, Lentz AC. Sexual quality of life and satisfaction with penile prostheses. Sex Med Rev. 2019;7(1):178-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sxmr.2018.10.003
  16. Singh A, Cooper CA, Hou SW, Raheem OA. A Systematic Review of Partner Satisfaction After Penile Prosthesis with Special Emphasis on LGBTQ + Populations. Curr Urol Rep. 2023;24(2):105-15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-022-01126-5
  17. Salonia A, Bettocchi C, Carvalho J, et al. European Association of Urology. EAU Guidelines on Sexual and Reproductive Health [Internet]. European Urology. 2022 [March 29, 2022]. Available at: https://uroweb.org/guidelines/sexual-and-reproductive-health
  18. Levine LA, Becher EF, Bella AJ, et al. Penile Prosthesis Surgery: Current Recommendations From the International Consultation on Sexual Medicine. J Sex Med. 2016;13(4):489-518. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsxm.2016.01.017
  19. Pisano F, Falcone M, Abbona A, et al. The Importance of Psychosexual Counselling in the Re-establishment of Organic and Erotic Functions After Penile Prosthesis Implantation. Int J Impot Res. 2015;27(5):197-200. https://doi.org/ 10.1038/ijir.2015.17
  20. Salonia A, Bettocchi C, Capogrosso P, et al. EAU Guidelines on Sexual and Reproductive Health - Limited Update 2023. [Internet]. European Urology. 2023 (Limited Update Edition). Available at: https://uroweb.org/guidelines/sexual-and-reproductive-health