Predictive correlation between the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) and Sexual Health Inventory for Men (SHIM): implications for calculating a derived SHIM for clinical use.
ABSTRACT Validated questionnaires are used to assess postoperative continence, sexual function, and other quality-of-life issues after radical prostatectomy. The International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) is one such well-tested inventory that is routinely used. However, some centers use the Sexual Health Inventory for Men (SHIM) or the IIEF-6 to record erectile function, and comparison between the three can be difficult.
To define if there was a predictive correlation between IIEF (or IIEF-6) and SHIM, and to explore a strategy for the use of an abbreviated and rapid functional assessment of erectile function in patients.
Preoperative and postoperative IIEF questionnaires from the robotic prostatectomy program at our institution were included in the study. The total IIEF, IIEF-6, and SHIM scores were calculated and correlations between the three were sought. We also looked at the feasibility of using only two questions from the IIEF with an aim of calculating both the SHIM and IIEF scores.
The power to differentiate between patients with SHIM >or=22 from those with SHIM <or=21 for (i) the ratio allowing direct conversion of IIEF (or IIEF-6) to SHIM; and (ii) a two-question-based recalculation of SHIM.
Two hundred seventy-five questionnaires were available for review. If the total IIEF score is known, the IIEF-derived SHIM score can be calculated by dividing the total IIEF score by a factor of 2.8 and then rounding off to a whole number. Furthermore, we have shown that an abbreviated questionnaire using Q5 and Q15 of the IIEF can be used to calculate the SHIM scores (two-question-SHIM).
We described an easy way to calculate the SHIM score when the IIEF (or IIEF-6) score alone is known. The two-question model can be used for a rapid assessment of the patients' sexual function.
- SourceAvailable from: Stanley Althof[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Erectile dysfunction (ED) can significantly impact a man's relationships and well-being. We assessed changes in self-esteem, confidence, sexual relationship satisfaction, and overall relationship satisfaction in men with ED using the validated Self-Esteem And Relationship questionnaire (SEAR). This was a 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, flexible-dose (25, 50, 100 mg, as needed) international study of sildenafil in men > or =18 years of age in Mexico, Brazil, Australia, and Japan. The primary study outcome was change in self-esteem from baseline to the end of treatment. Secondary study measures were changes in other SEAR components, International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) domains, percentage of intercourse attempts that were successful, and the response to a global efficacy question at the end of treatment. Patients were well balanced for age and duration of ED (placebo = 149 and sildenafil = 151). Compared with placebo, sildenafil significantly improved self-esteem, confidence, sexual relationship satisfaction, and overall relationship satisfaction (P < 0.0001). The psychosocial measures of well-being assessed with the SEAR were positively correlated (range 0.60-0.86, P < 0.0001) with erectile function, the frequency of achieving erections that allowed satisfactory sexual intercourse, the percentage of successful sexual intercourse attempts, and global treatment efficacy. Significant improvements in self-esteem, confidence, sexual relationship satisfaction, and overall relationship satisfaction after treatment of ED with sildenafil were consistent among countries. These data suggest a substantial cross-cultural improvement in well-being after successful treatment of ED with sildenafil.Journal of Sexual Medicine 06/2006; 3(3):521-9. · 3.51 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To develop a brief, reliable, self-administered measure of erectile function that is cross-culturally valid and psychometrically sound, with the sensitivity and specificity for detecting treatment-related changes in patients with erectile dysfunction. Relevant domains of sexual function across various cultures were identified via a literature search of existing questionnaires and interviews of male patients with erectile dysfunction and of their partners. An initial questionnaire was administered to patients with erectile dysfunction, with results reviewed by an international panel of experts. Following linguistic validation in 10 languages, the final 15-item questionnaire, the international index of Erectile Function (IIEF), was examined for sensitivity, specificity, reliability (internal consistency and test-retest repeatability), and construct (concurrent, convergent, and discriminant) validity. A principal components analysis identified five factors (that is, erectile function, orgasmic function, sexual desire, intercourse satisfaction, and overall satisfaction) with eigenvalues greater than 1.0. A high degree of internal consistency was observed for each of the five domains and for the total scale (Cronbach's alpha values of 0.73 and higher and 0.91 and higher, respectively) in the populations studied. Test-retest repeatability correlation coefficients for the five domain scores were highly significant. The IIEF demonstrated adequate construct validity, and all five domains showed a high degree of sensitivity and specificity to the effects of treatment. Significant (P values = 0.0001) changes between baseline and post-treatment scores were observed across all five domains in the treatment responder cohort, but not in the treatment nonresponder cohort. The IIEF addresses the relevant domains of male sexual function (that is, erectile function, orgasmic function, sexual desire, intercourse satisfaction, and overall satisfaction), is psychometrically sound, and has been linguistically validated in 10 languages. This questionnaire is readily self-administered in research or clinical settings. The IIEF demonstrates the sensitivity and specificity for detecting treatment-related changes in patients with erectile dysfunction.Urology 07/1997; 49(6):822-30. · 2.42 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Sexual satisfaction is an important aspect of overall life satisfaction. The Male Sexual Quotient (MSQ) was designed to provide a versatile, user-friendly instrument to measure various aspects of male sexual function and satisfaction. Assess responses to the MSQ in men with sexual dysfunction (SD). Items for inclusion in the MSQ were developed through interviewing 612 randomly recruited men in São Paulo, Brazil, about factors considered to influence sexual quality of life. Validation of the MSQ was conducted in two phases in men with and without SD. The correlation between patients' total MSQ score and scores on the Sexual Health Inventory for Men (SHIM). The resulting MSQ questionnaire contains 10 items that address sexual function and satisfaction and is scored on a 100-point scale, with higher scores indicating greater sexual function and satisfaction with such function. Patients' scores on the MSQ were positively correlated with scores on the SHIM (r = 0.86; P < 0.0001). Scores on MSQ item 8, which assesses ejaculatory control, indicated that 46% of patients may have premature ejaculation (PE). The mean time for patients to complete the MSQ was 11 minutes. The MSQ is a brief, comprehensive, and easily self-administered tool designed to help men identify aspects of their sexual experience that could be improved through partner dialogue, physician consultation, and appropriate treatment. MSQ scores correlated well with SHIM scores, and scores were inversely related to the severity of erectile dysfunction or PE and other male SDs. These preliminary findings suggest that the MSQ possesses good convergent validity. Nearly half of men reported problems with ejaculatory control, indicating an association between PE and other SD. Further validation of the MSQ in a double-blind trial is needed. The MSQ may aid in decision making for the treatment of SD.Journal of Sexual Medicine 04/2007; 4(2):382-9. · 3.51 Impact Factor