Skip to main content
Log in

Evaluation of the patient with erectile dysfunction

History, questionnaires, and physical examination

  • Published:
Endocrine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Historically the province of urologists and sex therapists, erectile dysfunction (ED) is now managed predominantly by primary care practitioners. In recognition of this trend, simplified assessment and treatment models have been proposed. These new treatment models strongly emphasize the need for sexual inquiry in all middle-age and older men but deemphasize the value of intensive medical or psychologic assessment in most cases. New management guidelines emphasize the need for a brief sexual and medical history, physical examination, and standard laboratory tests to rule out diabetes, dyslipidemia, or hypogonadism.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Process of Care Consensus Panel. (1999). Int. J. Impot. Res. 11, 59–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Jardin, A., Wagner, G., Khoury, S., et al. (2000). In: Erectile dysfunction. Jardin, A., Wagner, G., Khoury, S., et al. (eds.). Plymbridge Distributors: Plymouth, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Feldman, H. A., et al. (1994). J. Urol. 151, 54–61.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Brookes, S. T., Donovan, J. L., Peters, T. J., Abrams, P., and Neal, D. E. (2002). BMJ 324, 1059–1061.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Goldstein, I., et al. (1984). JAMA 251, 903–910.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Quinlan, D. M., Epstein, J. I., Carter, B. S., and Walsh, P. C. (1991). J. Urol. 145, 998–1002.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Araujo, A. B., et al. (1998). Psychosom. Med. 60, 458–465.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Korenman, S. G., et al. (1990). J. Clin. Endrocrinol. Metab. 71, 963–969.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Schiavi, R. (1990). Annu. Rev. Sex. Res. 1, 227–250.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Zonszein, J. (1995). Urol. Clin. North Am. 22, 789–802.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Braun, M., Wassmer, G., Klotz, T., et al. (2000). Int. J. Impot. Res. 12, 305–311.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Courtois, F. J., McDougall, J. C., and Sachs, B. D. (1993). Physiol. Behav. 53, 721–726.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Dunn, K. M., Croft, P. R., and Hackett, G. I. (1998). Fam. Pract. 15(6), 519–524.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Fulgham, P. F., et al. (1998). J. Urol. 159, 237.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Laumann, E. O., Paik, A., and Rosen, R. C. (1999). JAMA 281(6), 537–544.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Rosen, R. C., Riley, A., Wagner, G., Osterloh, I., Kirkpatrick, J., and Mishra, A. (1997). Urology 49, 822–830.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Rosen, R. C., Cappelleri, J. C., Smith, M. D., Lipsky, J., and Pena, B. M. (1999). Int. J. Impot. 11(6), 319–326.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Raymond C. Rosen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rosen, R.C. Evaluation of the patient with erectile dysfunction. Endocr 23, 107–111 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1385/ENDO:23:2-3:107

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1385/ENDO:23:2-3:107

Key Words

Navigation