Penile constriction devices: a randomized survey study to compare preferences between two medical-grade devices (2024)

Article Navigation

Journal Article

Get access

,

Daniela Orozco Rendon, BS

Baylor College of Medicine

, The Scott Department of Urology,

Houston, TX

,

United States

Search for other works by this author on:

Oxford Academic

,

Gal Saffati, MD

Baylor College of Medicine

, The Scott Department of Urology,

Houston, TX

,

United States

Search for other works by this author on:

Oxford Academic

,

Christine Whitehead, BSN, RN

Reproductive Medicine Associates of New Jersey

,

Basking Ridge, NJ

,

United States

Search for other works by this author on:

Oxford Academic

,

Caroline Zuckerman, BS, RN

Reproductive Medicine Associates of New Jersey

,

Basking Ridge, NJ

,

United States

Search for other works by this author on:

Oxford Academic

,

Amy Hom, BS

Reproductive Medicine Associates of New Jersey

,

Basking Ridge, NJ

,

United States

Search for other works by this author on:

Oxford Academic

,

Riley Daily, MS

FirmTech, Inc.

,

Bozeman, MT

,

United States

Search for other works by this author on:

Oxford Academic

,

Mohit Khera, MD, MPH, MBA

Baylor College of Medicine

, The Scott Department of Urology,

Houston, TX

,

United States

Search for other works by this author on:

Oxford Academic

Philip J Cheng, MD

Reproductive Medicine Associates of New Jersey

,

Basking Ridge, NJ

,

United States

Corresponding author: Department of Urology, Reproductive Medicine Associates of New Jersey, NJ 07920, United States. Email: philipj.cheng@gmail.com

Search for other works by this author on:

Oxford Academic

The Journal of Sexual Medicine, qdae151, https://doi.org/10.1093/jsxmed/qdae151

Published:

14 November 2024

Article history

Received:

17 April 2024

Revision received:

07 October 2024

Accepted:

23 October 2024

Published:

14 November 2024

  • Views
    • Article contents
    • Figures & tables
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Supplementary Data
  • Cite

    Cite

    Daniela Orozco Rendon, Gal Saffati, Christine Whitehead, Caroline Zuckerman, Amy Hom, Riley Daily, Mohit Khera, Philip J Cheng, Penile constriction devices: a randomized survey study to compare preferences between two medical-grade devices, The Journal of Sexual Medicine, 2024;, qdae151, https://doi.org/10.1093/jsxmed/qdae151

    Close

Search

Close

Search

Advanced Search

Search Menu

Abstract

Background

Penile constriction devices offer a noninvasive approach to enhance the sexual experience and as the variety of penile constriction devices increases, it is crucial to assess patient preferences and device effectiveness to provide insights into their clinical utility.

Aim

We aimed to compare the preferences for and effectiveness of two medical-grade penile constriction devices: Eddie by Giddy and FirmTech.

Methods

Between May and July of 2023, males were recruited via social media and prospectively enrolled into an Institutional Review Board-approved, randomized, questionnaire-based study. Upon enrollment, the participants completed the Sexual Health Inventory for Men and Androgen Deficiency in Aging Males questionnaires. Participants were randomized to which device they received first. They used the device twice either during masturbation or intercourse in a two-week timeframe. Once utilized, the participants completed a 17-question, Likert scale, device satisfaction questionnaire, in which lower numbers indicated positive responses. The process was repeated with the second device. T-test and Chi-Square Analysis were run for statistical analysis.

Outcomes

The primary outcomes of this study were patient-reported device satisfaction and efficacy and the secondary outcome was the device preference for patients with and without erectile dysfunction.

Results

Fifty men were enrolled and 49 completed the study. The average age was 40years old. Of the participants, 80% recommend the FirmTech device compared to 53% who recommend the Eddie by Giddy device (P= 0.0026). The FirmTech device was overall easier to put on both flaccid and erect (P= 0.0308 and 0.0002), was more comfortable, had better stretch, and was easier to adjust (P= 0.087, <0.0001, and 0.0119, respectively). The FirmTech device had a better overall impression amongst the participants (P= 0.0249). Eddie by Giddy was felt to improve erectile firmness more in those with ED than in those without (P = 0.0178).

Clinical Implications

This study adds to the current literature on penile constriction devices that better guide providers as they counsel patients on these devices to enhance sexual function.

Strengths and Limitations

The strength of this study is that this is a prospective randomized crossover study. The limitations of this study are that this is a single center study based on patient reported outcomes.

Conclusion

The FirmTech device performed better than the Eddie by Giddy with respect to overall impression of the device, likelihood of using the device in the future, and recommending the device to a friend, while the Eddie by Giddy device performed better at improving erectile firmness.

Clinical Trial Registration Number

NCT05853822.

erectile dysfunction, sex tools, penile constriction device, patient satisfaction

© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The International Society for Sexual Medicine. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com

This article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model (https://academic.oup.com/pages/standard-publication-reuse-rights)

Issue Section:

Erectile Function

You do not currently have access to this article.

Download all slides

Sign in

Get help with access

Personal account

  • Sign in with email/username & password
  • Get email alerts
  • Save searches
  • Purchase content
  • Activate your purchase/trial code
  • Add your ORCID iD

Sign in Register

Institutional access

    Sign in through your institution

    Sign in through your institution

  1. Sign in with a library card
  2. Sign in with username/password
  3. Recommend to your librarian

Institutional account management

Sign in as administrator

Get help with access

Institutional access

Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways:

IP based access

Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account.

Sign in through your institution

Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth/Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institution’s website and Oxford Academic.

  1. Click Sign in through your institution.
  2. Select your institution from the list provided, which will take you to your institution's website to sign in.
  3. When on the institution site, please use the credentials provided by your institution. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
  4. Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic.

If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institution’s website, please contact your librarian or administrator.

Sign in with a library card

Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian.

Society Members

Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways:

Sign in through society site

Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see ‘Sign in through society site’ in the sign in pane within a journal:

  1. Click Sign in through society site.
  2. When on the society site, please use the credentials provided by that society. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
  3. Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic.

If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society.

Sign in using a personal account

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below.

Personal account

A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions.

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members.

Viewing your signed in accounts

Click the account icon in the top right to:

  • View your signed in personal account and access account management features.
  • View the institutional accounts that are providing access.

Signed in but can't access content

Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian.

Institutional account management

For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more.

Purchase

Subscription prices and ordering for this journal

Purchasing options for books and journals across Oxford Academic

Short-term Access

To purchase short-term access, please sign in to your personal account above.

Don't already have a personal account? Register

Penile constriction devices: a randomized survey study to compare preferences between two medical-grade devices - 24 Hours access

EUR €39.00

GBP £34.00

USD $42.00

Rental

Penile constriction devices: a randomized survey study to compare preferences between two medical-grade devices (6)

This article is also available for rental through DeepDyve.

Advertisement

Citations

Views

41

Altmetric

More metrics information

Metrics

Total Views 41

29 Pageviews

12 PDF Downloads

Since 11/1/2024

Month: Total Views:
November 2024 41

Citations

Powered by Dimensions

Altmetrics

×

Email alerts

Article activity alert

Advance article alerts

New issue alert

Receive exclusive offers and updates from Oxford Academic

Related articles in

  • Google Scholar

Citing articles via

Google Scholar

  • Latest

  • Most Read

  • Most Cited

Psychological modalities for the treatment of localized provoked vulvodynia: a scoping review of literature from 2010 to 2023
Worldwide study reveals fluid sexual preferences in females and no association between gynephilia and non-heterosexuality
Response to the Letter to the Editor on “Grz variations in objectively measured sleep parameters in patients with different premature ejaculation syndromes”
Anatomic maps of erogenous and aversive sensation zones of the breasts, vulva, and vagina: a questionnaire-based study
Response to Letter to the Editor on “Antibiotic dip and irrigation solutions confer increased antimicrobial efficacy of inflatable penile prosthesis hydrophilic surfaces compared with 0.05% chlorhexidine gluconate”

More from Oxford Academic

Medicine and Health

Books

Journals

Advertisement

Penile constriction devices: a randomized survey study to compare preferences between two medical-grade devices (2024)
Top Articles
Latest Posts
Recommended Articles
Article information

Author: Stevie Stamm

Last Updated:

Views: 6425

Rating: 5 / 5 (80 voted)

Reviews: 87% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Stevie Stamm

Birthday: 1996-06-22

Address: Apt. 419 4200 Sipes Estate, East Delmerview, WY 05617

Phone: +342332224300

Job: Future Advertising Analyst

Hobby: Leather crafting, Puzzles, Leather crafting, scrapbook, Urban exploration, Cabaret, Skateboarding

Introduction: My name is Stevie Stamm, I am a colorful, sparkling, splendid, vast, open, hilarious, tender person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.