The Subjective Aspect of Men - Coursework Example

Qualitative Research on Erectile Dysfunction Summary Tomlinson and Wright (2004) ventured on the impact of erectile dysfunction in men given sildenafil treatment through exploratory qualitative methods. Through this they aim to ascertain the influence of the condition in the personal lives of men, in their relationships with their partners, friends, and colleagues, and scrutinize the effect of the success of failure of sildenafil as treatment. In this endeavor they pursue for qualitative outcomes instead of the quantitative results other researches have given and continue to participate in (Sommer, Klotz, & Engelmann, 2007; Kadioglu, et al., 2007). They give importance to the emotions of men as influenced by the condition and the prescribed drug. Considering Justifications Researchers express that there are several studies delving on the effects of impotence, and some acknowledging the psychosocial and social effects of the condition, but very few giving attention to the feelings of men with the condition and given sildenafil treatment. For such reason, the present work was conducted, emphasizing on the impact of erectile dysfunction in men, in their relationships, and the influence of sildenafil as given treatment. The co-existence of both erectile dysfunction and depression are noted, but the causal relationship is unclear (Seidman & Roose, 2000), and the present work somehow touches on this manner. It is also established that sildenafil has created a media hype upon its release, and was perceived to reach other parts that other drugs cannot reach (Berger, 1998). Methods The researchers conducted an exploratory qualitative study on the topic. To obtain participants for the study, a random sampling was conducted to 302 new referrals to the clinic who were prescribed with sildenafil 12 months before the study was conducted. They were divided into categories as to successful sildenafil treatment and failed treatment. The basis as to whether the medication was successful or not relied in the judgment of the patients, where successful treatment always meant achieving successful penetrative intercourse, and failure was inability to have an erection adequate for penetration (Tomlinson & Wright, 2004). Potential participants were contacted through the telephone, which yielded 40 men, 20 in each category, to be interviewed. The age of the respondents range from 22-72 years old, with median age of 51.8 years. These figures were comparable to the entire 302 men where the sample was taken, ages ranging from 16-84 years of age, with a median of 59 years. The respondents were assured that their participation in the study would not affect the effects of the treatment. Prior to each interview, a written consent was obtained from the participant. Interviews were usually conducted in a private room of the hospital, at a time convenient for the interviewee. These were audiotaped and lasted up to 45 minutes. Instead of having an outside researcher to conduct the interview, the interviewer was also the same person who prescribed sildenafil. The semistructured interviews allowed for identification and exploration of issues that were brought up by the participants. Qualitative research methods are usually utilized when the study concerns deeper meanings of particular human experiences, and are typically flexible, allowing research procedures to evolve as more observations are gathered (Rubin & Babbie, 2009). In this case where the researchers intend to focus on the feelings of men with erectile dysfunction, the said research method, as used, is deemed appropriate. The sample, only 40 out of 302, could have been a larger amount, however, the researchers were not able to define who were considered “potential participants,” or give more specific criteria besides being new referrals from the clinic prescribed with silfdenafil a year before the study commenced. Informed consent is always essential in any scientific undertaking, which was not failed to be mentioned in the article. The researchers also acknowledged that having an inside researcher, one who conducted the interview, may pose problems in informed consent and potential bias, but reported that these were minimized through a careful recruitment procedure (Tomlinson & Wright, 2004) which was not specified as well. The researcher as a research instrument plays an important role in qualitative studies. A possible dilemma in the circumstance that the interviewee knows that the interviewer is a doctor or that he is his patient is that the patient would respond in a way he thinks the doctor would like him to answer, which could be minimised if the interviewee is given permission to say what he really thinks in the event that such arrangement could not be avoided (Britten, 1995). Also, since the interviewer is part of the research team, he may subconsciously have the urge to incline data to desired results, thus a potential bias. Albeit these risks are existing, the sensitivity of the present topic deems the process acceptable, considering that actions to eliminate such were done. Data analysis occurred simultaneously with data collection because of the presence of emerging themes that would be explored in the following interviews. In order to come up with a coding strategy, the first 6 transcripts were independently analysed. The remaining transcripts used coding strategies that were modified as new themes were introduced by the participants. As a nature of qualitative studies, the process of data gathering and analysis are not fixed at certain points, to allow exploration and adjustments. These are seen in the present work. Outcomes Researchers divide their results into four sections, where they elaborate on the participant’s initial reaction to erectile dysfunction, their expectations of sildenafil before treatment, reactions to successful erection, and reactions to unsuccessful treatment needs (Tomlinson & Wright, 2004). Emasculation was the most common initial reaction to the condition, sometimes so severe that it affects their relationships with partners, colleagues, and friends. This is supported by the idea that historically, men’s bodies have been understood as sexed rather than reproductive bodies, images associated with a ‘manly’ masculinity than one in position for procreative function (Gunning & Holm, 2007). The media hype for sildenafil was so intense that public response to the drug was so great, and resulted in 120,000 prescriptions in its second week alone (Fruhstuck, 2003). In the same light, results show that majority of the respondents heard of the drug through the media, and they had high expectations of its effect, brought about by exaggerated promotion. Participants who had successful erections upon taking the drug reported to feel elated and happy, with the return of confidence in their masculinity. On the other hand, those who did not react successfully to the drug expressed negative feelings, especially if they have tried to take it again but still gained no results. It is found that the higher one expected from sildenafil because of media hype, the more depressed he will be when it does not work on him. Strengths and Limitations Focusing on the subjective aspect of men with erectile dysfunction and sildenafil treatment, the researchers may have pioneered the venture in this area. Althof et al. (2006) concluded that sildenafil improves self-esteem, confidence, and relationships in men with erectile dysfunction, but do not focus on qualitative measures. The paper is presented thoroughly from top to bottom to allow readers to understand the entire study as much as possible, but as mentioned above, there are some specifics that were failed to be mentioned. The outcomes of the study will certainly aid future undertakings on the topic, and will be helpful for health practitioners dealing with this condition. However, it is recommended that a study with a larger sample be conducted, as well as a deeper investigation on the impact of failed sildenafil treatments. Generally speaking, the study is concise and highly informative, but could be enhanced further in the future. References Althof, S.E., et al., 2006. Sildenafil cirtrate improves self-esteem, confidence, and relationships in men with erectile dysfunction: results from an international, multi-center, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Journal of Sexual Medicine, 3, pp.521-529. Berger, A. The rise and fall of Viagra. British Medical Journal, 317, p.824. Britten, N., 1995. Qualitative interviews in medical research. British Medical Journal, 311, pp.251-253. Fruhstuck, S., 2003. Colonizing sex: sexology and social control in modern Japan. California: University of California Press. Gunning, J., & Holm, S. eds., 2007. Ethics, law and society. Vol. 3. England: Ashgate. Kadioglu, A., et al., 2007. Quality of erections in men treated with flexible-dose sildenafil for erectile dysfunction: multicenter trial with a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase and an open-label phase. Journal of Sexual Medicine, 5, pp.726+. Rubin A., & Babbie, E., 2009. Essential research methods for social work. 2nd ed. California: Cengage Learning. Seidman, S.N., & Roose, S. P., 2000. The relationship between depression and erectile dysfunction. Current Psychiatry Reports, 2, pp.201-205. Sommer, F., Klotz, T., & Engelmann, U., 2007. Improved spontaneous erectile function in men with mild-to -moderate arteriogenic erectile dysfunction treated with a nightly dose of sildenafil for one year: a randomized trial. Asian journal of Andrology, 9 (1), pp.134-141. Tomlinson, J.M., & Wright D., 2004. Impact of erectile dysfunction and its subsequent treatment of sildenafil: qualitative study. British Medical Journal Online, [Online]. Available at: http://www.bmj.com/content/328/7447/1037.full.pdf [Accessed 10 February 2011]. Read More