MP79-13 QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF AMAZON REVIEWS FOR A VARIETY OF CONSTRICTION RINGS

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyCME1 Apr 2023MP79-13 QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF AMAZON REVIEWS FOR A VARIETY OF CONSTRICTION RINGS Adam Thomas, Elizabeth Dyer, and Susan MacDonald Adam ThomasAdam Thomas More articles by this author , Elizabeth DyerElizabeth Dyer More articles by this author , and Susan MacDonaldSusan MacDonald More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000003356.13AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Patient experiences and expectations with constriction rings for erectile dysfunction (ED) are not well described. In this study, we query patients’ perspectives on commercially available constriction rings and catalog positive and negative factors associated with their experience. METHODS: An Amazon search using the terms “ED constriction ring'' and“cock ring” resulted in 9 independent products that were included in the study. The most recent 10% of reviews on the product were used for analysis. Two researchers (AT and ED) assigned overall sentiment codes (positive, indifferent or negative) and positive or negative codes (see Table 1) to all reviews (n=413). Inter-rater reliability was considered strong (κ=0.82). Discrepancies in analysis were decided by a third independent reviewer SM. A codebook was developed using grounded theory methodology with both inductive and deductive codes. RESULTS: Amazon reviews of constriction rings were more frequently positive (n=242) than negative (n=136) in overall sentiment. The most frequent praise was based on appropriate sizing of the product (n=79) followed by the comfort of the ring (n=74). The most frequent complaint was associated with inappropriate sizing of the product (n=79) followed by quality of the product (n=50). The device with the greatest number of reviews mentioning effective erectile enhancement was the Eddie by Giddy, and the device with the most negative mentions of ineffective use was the Utimi Adjustable ring set. Of note a significant number of reviews detail the device being worn around both the phallus as well as the scrotum (x=15), which is contrary to medical advice. Additionally, a small number of reviews comment on wearing the device for long periods to enhance the appearance of genitalia under clothing (x=5). CONCLUSIONS: Constriction rings appear to be well tolerated by patients for the treatment of ED based on qualitative analysis of reviews. Sizing options in conjunction with proper size selection and product design are important factors to overall satisfaction with the device. Source of Funding: None © 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 209Issue Supplement 4April 2023Page: e1146 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Adam Thomas More articles by this author Elizabeth Dyer More articles by this author Susan MacDonald More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...