Working clinically with gay men with sexual performance problems

"I Want to Feel Like a Full Man": Conceptualizing Gay, Bisexual, and Heterosexual Men's Sexual Difficulties

Current understandings of sexual difficulties originate from a model that is based on the study of heterosexual men and women. Most research has focused on sexual difficulties experienced by heterosexual men incapable of engaging in vaginal penetration. To better understand men's perceptions and experiences of sexual difficulties, seven focus groups and 29 individual interviews were conducted with gay (n = 22), bisexual (n = 5), and heterosexual (n = 25) men. In addition, the extent to which difficulties reported by gay and bisexual men differ from heterosexual men was explored. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis applying an inductive approach. Two intercorrelated conceptualizations were identified: penis function (themes: medicalization, masculine identity, psychological consequences, coping mechanisms) and pain (themes: penile pain, pain during receptive anal sex). For the most part, gay, bisexual, and heterosexual men reported similar sexual difficulties; differences were evident regarding alternative masculinity, penis size competition, and pain during receptive anal sex. The results of this study demonstrate the complexity of men's sexual difficulties and the important role of sociocultural, interpersonal, and psychological factors. Limitations and suggested directions for future research are outlined.

2016 United Kingdom national guideline on the sexual health care of men who have sex with men

This guideline is intended for use in UK Genitourinary medicine clinics and sexual health services but is likely to be of relevance in all sexual health settings, including general practice and Contraception and Sexual Health (CASH) services, where men who have sex with men (MSM) seek sexual health care or where addressing the sexual health needs of MSM may have public health benefits. For the purposes of this document, MSM includes all gay, bisexual and all other males who have sex with other males and both cis and trans men. This document does not provide guidance on the treatment of particular conditions where this is covered in other British Association for Sexual Health and HIV (BASHH) Guidelines but outlines best practice in multiple aspects of the sexual health care of MSM. Where prevention of sexually transmitted infections including HIV can be addressed as an integral part of clinical care, this is consistent with the concept of combination prevention and is included. The document is designed primarily to provide guidance on the direct clinical care of MSM but also makes reference to the design and delivery of services with the aim of supporting clinicians and commissioners in providing effective services. Methodology This document was produced in accordance with the guidance set out in the BASHH CEG's document 'Framework for guideline development and assessment' published in 2010 at http://www.bashh.org/guidelines and with reference to the Agree II instrument. Following the production of the updated framework in April 2015, the GRADE system for assessing evidence was adopted and the draft recommendations were regraded. Search strategy (see also Appendix 1) Ovid Medline 1946 to December 2014, Medline daily update, Embase 1974 to December 2014, Pubmed NeLH Guidelines Database, Cochrane library from 2000 to December 2014. Search language English only. The search for Section 3 was conducted on PubMed to December 2014. Priority was given to peer-reviewed papers published in scientific journals, although for many issues evidence includes conference abstracts listed on the Embase database. In addition, for 'Identification of problematic recreational drug and alcohol use' section and 'Sexual problems and dysfunctions in MSM' section, searches included PsycINFO. Methods Article titles and abstracts were reviewed and if relevant the full text article was obtained. Priority was given to randomised controlled trial and systematic review evidence, and recommendations made and graded on the basis of best available evidence. Piloting and feedback The first draft of the guideline was circulated to the writing group and to a small group of relevant experts, third sector partners and patient representatives who were invited to comment on the whole document and specifically on particular sections. The revised draft was reviewed by the CEG and then reviewed by the BASHH patient/public panel and posted on the BASHH website for public consultation. The final draft was piloted before publication. Guideline update The guidelines will be reviewed and revised in five years' time, 2022.

Development and Psychometric Evaluation of the Gay Male Sexual Difficulties Scale

Sexual difficulties (i.e., disturbances in normal sexual responding) have the potential to significantly and negatively affect men's social and psychological well-being. However, a review of published measurement tools indicates that most have limited applicability to gay men, and none offer a nuanced understanding of sexual difficulties, as experienced by members of this population. To address this omission, the Gay Male Sexual Difficulties Scale (GMSDS) was developed using a sequential mixed-methods approach. The 25-item GMSDS uses a 6-point frequency Likert-type response format and examines: difficulties with receptive and insertive anal intercourse (5 items each); erectile difficulties (4 items); foreskin difficulties (4 items); body embarrassment (4 items); and seminal fluid concerns (3 items). The measure's scale score dimensionality, assessed using both exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, as well as scale score reliability and validity (e.g., known-groups and convergent) was tested and deemed to be satisfactory. Limitations of the current series of studies and directions for future research are discussed.

A systematic review of sexual dysfunction measures for gay men: how do current measures measure up?

The measurement of subjective components of sexual functioning is of increasing importance in clinical research and practice. Differences have been reported in prevalence rates and experiences of sexual difficulties between heterosexual and gay men. The aim of this article is to identify reliable and valid measures of sexual dysfunction suitable for use with gay men. Seven measures were reviewed; details about item development, dimensionality, reliability, and validity are provided. Heteronormative and heterosexist wording were evident throughout. Several areas of concern emerged in relation to psychometric properties (e.g., questionable validity). No psychometrically robust sexual function measure was identified for use with gay populations.

Sex and Diabetes: A Thematic Analysis of Gay and Bisexual Men’s Accounts

Around 50 per cent of men with diabetes experience erectile dysfunction. Much of the literature focuses on quality of life measures with heterosexual men in monogamous relationships. This study explores gay and bisexual men’s experiences of sex and diabetes. Thirteen interviews were analysed and three themes identified: erectile problems; other ‘physical’ problems; and disclosing diabetes to sexual partners. Findings highlight a range of sexual problems experienced by non-heterosexual men and the significance of the cultural and relational context in which they are situated. The personalized care promised by the UK government should acknowledge the diversity of sexual practices which might be affected by diabetes.