首页> 外文期刊>The journal of sexual medicine >Organic vs. psychogenic? The Manichean diagnosis in sexual medicine.
【24h】

Organic vs. psychogenic? The Manichean diagnosis in sexual medicine.

机译:有机性与心理性?性医学中的马尼切诊断。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

INTRODUCTION: The Manichean diagnosis, psychogenic or organic, is the first and most frequent diagnostic scope managing sexual disorders. The aim of this Controversy is to discuss if this philosophy is still useful both in the conceptual and clinical perspective. METHODS: Five scientists (an endocrinologist, two psychologist, and two urologists) with expertise in the area of psychosexology and sexual medicine were asked to contribute with their opinions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Expert opinion supported by the critical review of the currently available literature. RESULT: Expert # 1, who is Controversy's section Editor, suggests that the term psychogenic is redundant, because all sexual dysfunctions involve the mind and the relationship with (at least) one partner. Furthermore, he is strongly against the exclusion diagnosis, in agreement with the Expert # 5. The idea that the psychogenic etiology is always present is also sustained with good arguments by the Expert # 2. On the other hand, the two Experts # 3 and 4 argue that a pharmacological treatment such as type 5 phosphodiesterase inhibitors or dapoxetine work in both organic and psychogenic conditions and that the attempt to perform a diagnostic effort is frequently useless. Last but not least, the Expert # 5 concludes that the mind-body dualism is to be considered obsolete and unhelpful in a modern approach to the patient with a sexual dysfunction. CONCLUSIONS: The reader of the Journal will judge if there is still a room for the Manichean diagnosis of different sexual dysfunctions or if it is time to completely change our perspective on this essential aspect of clinical sexual medicine.
机译:简介:精神性或器质性的Manichean诊断是处理性疾病的首个也是最常见的诊断范围。这场争论的目的是讨论这种哲学在概念和临床上是否仍然有用。方法:五位在心理学和性医学领域具有专业知识的科学家(内分泌学家,两名心理学家和两名泌尿科医师)被要求发表意见。主要观察指标:专家意见得到当前文献的严格审查的支持。结果:有争议的部分编辑的专家#1建议,“心因”一词是多余的,因为所有性功能障碍都涉及思想以及与(至少)一个伴侣的关系。此外,他坚决反对排除诊断,这与专家5一致。专家2的论点也证明了始终存在心理病因的观点。另一方面,两位专家3和2 4认为,诸如5型磷酸二酯酶抑制剂或达泊西汀之类的药理学治疗既可以在自然条件下也可以在心理条件下起作用,而进行诊断努力的尝试通常是无用的。最后但并非最不重要的一点是,专家5得出结论,在对患有性功能障碍的患者的现代治疗方法中,心身二元论被认为已过时且无济于事。结论:《华尔街日报》的读者将判断是否仍有空间可以对不同的性功能障碍进行Manichean诊断,或者是否该是时候彻底改变我们对临床性医学这一基本方面的看法了。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号