Similarities and differences between men with self-reported lifelong and acquired difficulty reaching ejaculation

David L Rowland; Sean M McNabney; Drew R Attinger; Kathryn J Harrold; Zsuzsanna Kӧvi; Krisztina Hevesi

doi:10.1038/s41443-023-00752-y

Similarities and differences between men with self-reported lifelong and acquired difficulty reaching ejaculation

Int J Impot Res. 2023 Aug 17. doi: 10.1038/s41443-023-00752-y. Online ahead of print.

Authors

David L Rowland¹, Sean M McNabney², Drew R Attinger³, Kathryn J Harrold⁴, Zsuzsanna Kӧvi⁵, Krisztina Hevesi⁶

Affiliations

¹ Department of Psychology, Valparaiso University, Valparaiso, IN, USA. david.rowland@valpo.edu.
² Department of Applied Health Science, School of Public Health, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA.
³ Department of Psychology, Valparaiso University, Valparaiso, IN, USA.
⁴ Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Valparaiso University, Valparaiso, IN, USA.
⁵ Institute of Psychology, Károli Gáspár University of the Reformed Church, Budapest, Hungary.
⁶ Institute of Psychology, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary.

PMID: 37592174
DOI: 10.1038/s41443-023-00752-y

Abstract

Men with delayed ejaculation are often categorized into lifelong and acquired subtypes, yet little is known about similarities and differences between these groups. In this study, we examined whether delayed ejaculation subtypes differed on various demographic, diagnostic, relationship, and sexual activity/satisfaction variables. We drew 140 men reporting moderately-severe to severe difficulty reaching ejaculation during partnered sex (occurring during ≥75% of sexual events) from a convenience sample of over 3000 respondents obtained through an opt-in, multinational, online survey. Respondents were further classified as having lifelong or acquired delayed ejaculation based on self-report. A series of alpha-adjusted analyses of covariance were then made between subtypes on subsets of variables. In addition, the extent to which two potential confounding variables, age and erectile function, might have been responsible for subtype differences was explored. Results indicated that compared with men with acquired delayed ejaculation, men with lifelong delayed ejaculation were younger (28.6 vs 44.7 years, η²_p = 0.30, P < 0.001), reported greater delayed ejaculation symptomology (4.31 vs 3.98, P < 0.01, η²_p = 0.02), were less likely to attribute their problem to a medical issue or medication (1.7% vs 12.2%, P < 0.05), and more likely to masturbate for anxiety/distress reduction than for pleasure. In contrast, delayed ejaculation subtype differences related to masturbation frequency, pornography use during masturbation, and condom use disappeared when age and erectile functioning differences were statistically controlled. Overall, lifelong and acquired delayed ejaculation subtypes showed more similarities than differences. Findings worthy of clinical note were the lower level of endorsement of medical issues/medication by the lifelong subtype, their higher level of delayed ejaculation symptomology, and-despite a high level of anxiety/distress reported by both groups-their particular vulnerability to anxiety/distress as indicated by their strong motive to masturbate for anxiety/distress reduction (44.3% vs 19.6%, P < 0.05). Other differences between delayed ejaculation subtypes were better explained by group differences in age and erectile function than by subtype membership per se.