Description of and Relationships among Potential Variables Supported for the Diagnosis of Delayed Ejaculation

The lack of empirically based diagnostic criteria for delayed ejaculation (DE) not only undermines confidence in the reported prevalence rates for this sexual dysfunction, but it has also resulted in a lack of validated patient reported outcomes (PROs) for assessing this condition. The current study was designed to describe and evaluate six face-valid variables previously shown to discriminate between men with and without DE for their utility as diagnostic measures for DE. A sample of 1285 men (mean age = 37.8, SD = 12.7) free of erectile problems and premature ejaculation completed an online sexual health survey that included potential questions intended for use in the diagnosis of DE. Questionnaire items included ones reflective of previously proposed diagnostic constructs related to DE: ejaculation timing/latency, ejaculation efficacy/control, and negative effects of DE. Results indicated that five of the six proposed items showed moderate intercorrelations, suggesting that each constituted a distinct (i.e., non-redundant) though relevant criterion related to the diagnosis of DE. Based on the level of interrelatedness, the better items representing each construct were included in commonality analysis to assess their unique contributions to the diagnosis of DE. Perceived lack of ejaculatory efficacy/control contributed the largest portion of the variance to the diagnosis of DE (58%), with bother/distress (an index of the negative effects of DE) contributing the second largest portion (25%), and ejaculation timing/latency contributing only a small portion of the variance (6%) to the diagnosis of DE. The relevance of these findings to developing a patient report outcome (PRO) for diagnosing DE that considers both empirically supported questions/items and an appropriate balance of items regarding the three constructs was discussed.

The Tenuous Role of Distress in the Diagnosis of Premature Ejaculation: A Narrative Review

BACKGROUND

Unlike the other 2 criteria for diagnosing premature ejaculation (PE), namely lack of ejaculatory control and short ejaculation latency (EL), the role of bother/distress has received only minimal consideration and investigation.

AIM

The specific aim was to determine both why distress is included in the PE diagnosis and whether such inclusion is advantageous to achieving better diagnostic outcomes. To this end, the review explored the historical and theoretical underpinnings of the inclusion of "bother/ distress" in the diagnosis of PE, with reference to the larger role that distress has played in the diagnosis of mental disorders, in an attempt to understand the utility (or lack thereof) of this construct in making a PE diagnosis.

METHODS

We reviewed the role of bother/distress across current professional definitions for PE and then expanded this discussion to include the role of distress in other sexual dysfunctions. We then included a brief historical perspective regarding the role that distress has played in the diagnosis of PE. This discussion is followed by a deeper look at 2 nosological systems, namely DSM and ICD, to allow perspective on the inclusion of the bother/distress construct in the diagnosis of mental and behavioral disorders, including the assumptions/arguments put forward to include or exclude bother/distress as an important criterion underlying various professional assumptions.

OUTCOME

Determination of the value and/or need of including bother/distress as a necessary criterion for the diagnosis of PE.

RESULTS

Based on the research literature, bother/distress does not appear to be as critical for a PE diagnosis as either the lack of ejaculatory control or short EL. It is the weakest of the differences among men with and without PE, and recent evidence suggests that its inclusion is generally redundant with the severity of the 2 other criteria for PE, ejaculatory control and EL.

CLINICAL TRANSLATION

Bother/distress appears to serve little purpose in the diagnosis of PE yet its assessment may be important for the treatment strategy and for assessing treatment effectiveness.

STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS

This review did not provide a critical analysis of the literature regarding the role of bother/distress in PE, but rather focused on its potential value in understanding and diagnosing PE.

CONCLUSION

Although bother/distress appears to add little to the improvement of accuracy for a PE diagnosis, understanding and assessing the man's or couple's experience of distress has important implications for the treatment strategy and focus, as well as for assessing treatment success. Rowland DL, Cooper SE. The Tenuous Role of Distress in the Diagnosis of Premature Ejaculation: A Narrative Review. Sex Med 2022;XX:XXXXXX.

Are the Criteria for the Diagnosis of Premature Ejaculation Applicable to Gay Men or Sexual Activities Other than Penile-Vaginal Intercourse?

INTRODUCTION

The criteria for premature ejaculation (PE) have generally been limited to the diagnosis of heterosexual men engaging in penile-vaginal intercourse and therefore the applicability of PE diagnostic criteria to gay men and to activities beyond penile-vaginal intercourse has yet to be explored in depth.

AIM

To compare the prevalence of PE in gay and straight men and to assess whether PE-related diagnostic measures (ejaculatory control, ejaculation latency [EL], and bother/distress) can be applied with confidence to gay men or to men engaging in sexual activities other than penile-vaginal intercourse.

METHODS

Gay and straight participants (n = 3878) were recruited to take an online survey assessing sexual orientation, sexual function/dysfunction (including specific PE-related measures), sexual relationship satisfaction, and various other sexual behaviors during partnered sex or masturbation.

OUTCOMES

Comparison of ejaculatory control, EL, and bother/distress across gay and straight men, as well as across different types of sexual activities.

RESULTS

A slightly lower PE prevalence among gay men became undetectable when other predictors of prevalence were included in a multivariate analysis (aOR = 0.87 [95% CI: 0.60-1.22]). Gay men with PE reported longer typical ELs (zU = -3.35, P < .001) and lower distress (zU = 3.68, P < .001) relative to straight men, but longer ELs and lower distress were also associated with anal sex.

CLINICAL TRANSLATION

Clinicians can feel confident about using existing criteria for the diagnosis of PE in gay men but should be aware of potentially longer ELs and lower PE-related bother/distress-probably related to the practice of anal sex-compared with straight men.

STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS

Although well-powered and international in scope, this study was limited by biases inherent to online surveys, the lack of a sizable sample of bisexual men, and a lack of differentiation between men with acquired vs lifelong PE.

CONCLUSIONS

Irrespective of sexual orientation, gay and straight men with PE reported shorter ELs, lower satisfaction, and greater bother/distress than functional counterparts. While PE-related diagnostic criteria (ejaculatory control, EL, and bother/distress) are applicable to gay men, accommodation for longer ELs and lower bother/distress in gay men should be considered. McNabney SM, Weseman CE, Hevesi K, et al. Are the Criteria for the Diagnosis of Premature Ejaculation Applicable to Gay Men or Sexual Activities Other than Penile-Vaginal Intercourse?. Sex Med 2022;10:100516.

Premature Ejaculation Measures During Partnered Sex and Masturbation: What These Findings Tell Us About the Nature and Rigidity of Premature Ejaculation

Men with premature ejaculation (PE) during partnered sex (as defined by poor ejaculatory control) show significantly reduced PE symptomology during masturbation, but the reasons for this disparity are not clear. This study investigated the other two PE-related diagnostic criteria, namely ejaculatory latency (EL) and bother/distress, in order to explore possible explanations for this disparity between types of sexual activity. Specifically, 1,447 men with either normal or poor ejaculatory control were compared on EL parameters, bother/distress, and sexual satisfaction/pleasure during both partnered sex and masturbation. Results indicated that men with PE reported longer ELs during masturbation than partnered sex, in contrast with men without PE who reported shorter ELs during masturbation. Bother/distress was lower for both groups during masturbation, but bother/distress in men with PE during masturbation was comparable to that of men without PE during partnered sex. Minimal difference in these patterns was found across lifelong and acquired PE subtypes, whereas men with PE with comorbid erectile dysfunction appeared to represent a distinct group. These findings have implications for PE management or treatment as well as for the overall conceptualization of PE as a pathophysiological condition.

The Unfinished Business of Defining Premature Ejaculation: The Need for Targeted Research

INTRODUCTION

Fifteen years have passed since the International Society of Sexual Medicine first established the 3-pronged criteria for premature ejaculation (PE): a short ejaculation latency, lack of ejaculatory control, and bother/distress. Although the process of establishing valid criteria for any condition or disorder is an ongoing one, a dearth of targeted research on these criteria has hindered professional societies from updating and revising them.

OBJECTIVES

To review and critique existing criteria used in the diagnosis of PE, to identify specific problems with them, and to recommend studies that will address shortcomings.

METHODS

Each of the PE criteria was evaluated and compared against standard procedures for establishing validated measures. Following each analysis, targeted research to address the gaps has been recommended.

RESULTS

Each PE criterion has shortcomings and each can be improved by using standard validation procedures, as noted by the targeted research outcomes. Professional societies can play an important role by encouraging broad participation in research that generates new and relevant data supporting, validating, or challenging the existing criteria.

CONCLUSION

The concepts underlying the diagnostic criteria for PE have both broad consensus and functional utility. Nevertheless, much of the research investigating PE has uncritically adopted these criteria without concomitantly recognizing their limitations. These limitations prevent determining accurate prevalence rates, interpreting research findings with confidence, and establishing efficacious treatment outcomes. Rowland DL, Althof SE, McMahon CG. The Unfinished Business of Defining Premature Ejaculation: The Need for Targeted Research. Sex Med Rev 2021;XX:XXX-XXX.

Advances and Missteps in Diagnosing Premature Ejaculation: Analysis and Future Directions

BACKGROUND

There are several problems with diagnostic criteria for premature ejaculation (PE) that lack objectivity, clarity and precision. They hamper accurate determination of PE prevalence estimates, investigations into the etiology of the dysfunction, impact on partners, development of validated Patient Reported Outcomes, regulatory authority oversight, and which men might benefit from specific treatment interventions.

AIM

We sought to review, analyze and comment on the evolution of the definitions of PE and offer suggestions for future directions for PE definitions. Our goal is to propose strategies whereby the criterion sets are useful to researchers, clinicians and governmental oversight agencies alike and bring harmony and scientific rigor among the conflicting and confusing definitions.

METHODS

There are several premature ejaculation definitions published in the peer reviewed medical literature. The PUBMED electronic database from 1970 to 2021 was searched for published definitions. Search terms included the medical subject headings of premature ejaculation, definition and diagnosis. In chronological order, Table 1 lists the various diagnosis and criteria sets for PE. We discuss the process by which constructs, which make up diagnostic criteria sets, are operationalized and validated.

RESULTS

We review definitions of PE beginning with Masters and Johnson's focus on partner orgasmic attainment and move through the nebulous and subjective criterion sets found in the early Diagnostic and Statistical Manuals and International Classification of Disease series, to the more evidenced-based definitions found in International Society of Sexual Medicine, Diagnostic and Statistical Manuals-5 and the American Urological Association (AUA) definitions. Additionally, we discuss how constructs and criteria sets have been adopted to minimize errors of inclusion and exclusion in defining disease/dysfunction.

STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS

This manuscript offers a careful chronological analysis of the published definitions of PE. This historical lens allows the reader to perceive the shifting science underlying the development of PE definitions. The manuscript is limited regarding our comments on acquired PE as evidenced-based research is incomplete.

CONCLUSION

Over the past 50 years there has been considerable forward momentum in defining PE based on well conducted scientific studies. We support the American Urological Association's modification in Intravaginal ejaculatory latency time to 2-minutes for lifelong PE, concur with the 11th revision of the International Classification of Diseases recommendation for changing the terminology from premature ejaculation to early ejaculation. We also recommend ongoing validation of definitions, moving away from the current heterosexist definition of PE based on penile-vaginal sex and urge further population based research into acquired PE to develop stronger evidenced-based criterion sets for this subtype.

Do the diagnostic criteria for premature ejaculation apply to non-straight men and to sexual activities other than penile-vaginal intercourse?

Professional standards committees have generally applied the diagnostic criteria for premature ejaculation only to situations involving (presumed) heterosexual men having penile-vaginal intercourse. This paper reviews the existing evidence supporting expansion of the criteria for use among non-straight men engaging in sexual activities that do not include vaginal intercourse. In brief, estimated ejaculation latencies appear similar across men identifying with different sexual orientations, and various partnered sexual activities (oral, vaginal, and manual) tend to be well correlated. In contrast, masturbation latency patterns are different between men with and without premature ejaculation, and ejaculatory control and bother/distress may be less critical to gay men than straight men during partnered sex. Finally, it should be noted that existing patient report outcomes (PROs) require modification for use with non-straight men.