首页> 外文期刊>The journal of sexual medicine >Penile Length Measurement: Methodological Challenges and Recommendations, a Systematic Review
【24h】

Penile Length Measurement: Methodological Challenges and Recommendations, a Systematic Review

机译:阴茎长度测量:方法论挑战和建议,系统审查

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Background: Penile length measurement techniques vary widely in published studies leading to inaccurate and nonstandardized measurements. Aim: To review the methodology used to report data in studies evaluating penile length and provide a detailed recommendation in conducting future high-quality research. Methods: The MEDLINE database was searched for randomized clinical trials and open-label prospective or retrospective studies. Outcomes: The panel reviewed the modality of data reporting on these specific areas: patients' age and assessment, patient position, type of measurement instrument used, penile length technique description, examination conditions, and actual examiner. Results: Overall, 70 studies investigating penile length were selected; among these, 72.85% included at least 50 patients: 16 prospective studies, 5 randomized clinical trials, and 49 retrospective cross-sectional studies. Amongst all studies, 90% reported to measure penile length by health care practitioners in clinical settings. Penile length was assessed in all 70 studies, whereas penile girth was measured in 57.14% of patients. A semi-rigid ruler was the most commonly used measurement aid to assess penile length/girth in 62.86% of studies. Penile measurements were reportedly obtained: (i) stretched state, 60%; (ii) flaccid state only, 52.68%; and (iii) during erection, 27.43%. All studies investigating the penile length in an erect state were simultaneously assessing penile length in the flaccid state. About 90% of studies investigated penile length in adults, whereas 10% were conducted in adolescents. Clinical Implications: The use of shared methodology to assess penile length in both adults and adolescents allows more accurate and standardized measurements. Strength & Limitations: A systematic review of the published literature allowed proper data interpretation in order to provide accurate recommendations. Main limitations of the study relied on a relatively limited number of databases for the identification of potentially eligible studies. Conclusion: The methodology used in studies measuring penile length should be precise and standardized in order to provide accurate data to both clinicians and researchers. Copyright (C) 2021, International Society for Sexual Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
机译:背景:在已发表的研究中,阴茎长度测量技术差异很大,导致测量不准确和不标准。目的:回顾评估阴茎长度的研究中用于报告数据的方法,并为未来开展高质量研究提供详细建议。方法:在MEDLINE数据库中搜索随机临床试验和开放标签前瞻性或回顾性研究。结果:专家组回顾了这些特定领域的数据报告方式:患者年龄和评估、患者位置、使用的测量仪器类型、阴茎长度技术描述、检查条件和实际检查者。结果:总共选择了70项调查阴茎长度的研究;其中72.85%包括至少50名患者:16项前瞻性研究、5项随机临床试验和49项回顾性横断面研究。在所有研究中,90%的研究报告由医疗保健从业者在临床环境中测量阴茎长度。在所有70项研究中都评估了阴茎长度,而在57.14%的患者中测量了阴茎周长。在62.86%的研究中,半刚性直尺是评估阴茎长度/周长最常用的测量工具。据报道获得了阴茎测量结果:(i)拉伸状态,60%;(ii)仅为松弛状态,52.68%;(iii)安装期间,27.43%。所有研究勃起状态下阴茎长度的研究都同时评估了松弛状态下的阴茎长度。大约90%的研究调查了成年人的阴茎长度,而10%的研究是在青少年中进行的。临床意义:使用共享的方法评估成人和青少年的阴茎长度,可以进行更准确和标准化的测量。优势和局限性:对已发表文献的系统性审查允许进行适当的数据解释,以便提供准确的建议。该研究的主要局限性在于,用于确定潜在合格研究的数据库数量相对有限。结论:为了给临床医生和研究人员提供准确的数据,在测量阴茎长度的研究中使用的方法应该是精确和标准化的。版权所有(C)2021,国际性医学会。爱思唯尔公司出版。版权所有。

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