The Premature Ejaculation Profile: validation of self‐reported outcome measures for research and practice

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the reliability and validity of the Premature Ejaculation Profile (PEP), a self‐reported outcome instrument for evaluating domains of PE and its treatment, comprised of four single‐item measures, a profile, and an index score. SUBJECTS AND METHODS Data were from men participating in observational studies in the USA (PE, 207 men; non‐PE, 1380) and Europe (PE, 201; non‐PE, 914) and from men with PE (1238) participating in a phase III randomized, placebo‐controlled clinical trial of dapoxetine. The PEP contains four measures: perceived control over ejaculation, personal distress related to ejaculation, satisfaction with sexual intercourse, and interpersonal difficulty related to ejaculation, each assessed on five‐point response scales. Test‐retest reliability, known‐groups validity, and ability to detect a patient‐reported global impression of change (PGI) in condition were evaluated for the individual PEP measures and a PEP index score (the mean of all four measures). Profile analysis was conducted using multivariate analysis of variance. RESULTS All PEP measures showed acceptable reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients ranged from 0.66 to 0.83) and mean scores for all measures differed significantly between PE and non‐PE groups (P < 0.001). Men who reported a reduction in PE with treatment in the phase III trial had significantly greater scores on each of the four measures. The PEP profiles of men with and without PE differed significantly (P < 0.001) in both observational studies; higher levels of PGI were associated with higher PEP profiles (P < 0.001). The PEP index score also showed acceptable reliability and was significantly different between the PE and non‐PE groups (P < 0.001). Men who reported an improvement in PE with treatment in the phase III trial had significantly greater PEP index scores. In the phase III trial, nausea was the most common adverse event with dapoxetine. CONCLUSION The PEP provides a reliable, valid, and interpretable measure for use in monitoring outcomes of men with PE.

Cross-Cultural Adaptation of the Female Genital Self-Image Scale (FGSIS) in Iranian Female College Students

“…demonstrate the consistency and preservation of the psychometric properties of the translated and culturally adapted version of the PEDT for use in the Iranian male population. Different diagnostic methods for the identification of PE exist, including objective outcome measures such as IELT [25] and self-report questionnaires such as the Premature Ejaculation Profile (PEP) [47], the Chinese Index of Premature Ejaculation (CIPE), the Index of Premature Ejaculation (IPE) [48], and the Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGIC) [49]. Among these assessment instruments, only the IELT and the CIPE have been proven to have good sensitivity and specificity profiles and are therefore able to differentiate between men with and without PE.…”

Can Estimated Intravaginal Ejaculatory Latency Time Be Used Interchangeably With Stopwatch-measured Intravaginal Ejaculatory Latency Time for the Diagnosis of Lifelong Premature Ejaculation?

“…All patients underwent preliminary assessments including collection of medical and sexual history, physical examination, determination of eIELT, International Index of Erectile Function erectile function domain, PEDT, and the Premature Ejaculation Profile (PEP) questionnaire. 10,11 During the 1-week study period, patients were requested to engage in sexual intercourse at least twice and to record the time from foreplay to beginning intercourse (FTIT) and sIELT by the partner using a stopwatch.…”

“…A PEP index score, defined as the mean score of the 4 individual items, has been described as a valid and reliable measure of the general severity of PE. 11 Lifelong PE was diagnosed using the ISSM definition, including the 1-minute sIELT cutoff. 1,2…”

Coping with Premature Ejaculation: An Online Survey in a Representative Sample of the German Male Population Aged 18 to 64 Years

“…The sample was drawn from a pre-existing independent online panel (Research Now®) committed to the ethical code of the International Chamber of Commerce/World Association for market, social and opinion research (ICC/Esomar International, www.iccwbo.org). It guarantees its members anonymity and was representative of the German male population with respect to age and residence, which is mainly responsible for Internet access distribution in Germany rather than on socioeconomic status [7,8].…”