Contemporary treatment of sexual dysfunction: reexamining the biopsychosocial model.

INTRODUCTION: The introduction of phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors has revolutionized the armamentarium of clinicians in the field of sexual medicine. However, pharmacotherapy as a stand-alone treatment option has been criticized, particularly by psychosocial therapists, as incomplete. Specifically, it is widely argued that drug treatment alone often does not meet the standards of biopsychosocial (BPS) therapy. AIM: A literature review was performed to explore the role of the biopsychosocial paradigm in the treatment of sexual dysfunction and outline some of the key challenges and possible shortcomings in the current application of biopsychosocial treatment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Published treatment outcomes of integrative biopsychosocial clinical practice, including medical outcomes, psychological and relational factors, treatment of comorbid conditions, cost of treatment, and treatment efficacy, were investigated. METHODS: Using Medline, PubMed, and EMBASE databases, a literature search for articles published from January 1, 1980, to March 1, 2013, was performed, examining current approaches to the biopsychosocial model of sexual dysfunction and sexual medicine. Data were reviewed and combined, allowing characterization of current treatment approaches and recommendations for clinical practice and future research. RESULTS: The biopsychosocial model of treatment appears to have an intuitively obvious meaning (i.e., treatment of all three facets of the patient's biological-psychological-social condition). However, research suggests that clear treatment algorithms are still in development. By virtue of the ongoing development of biopsychosocial methods in sexual medicine, new models and research initiatives may be warranted. The evidence identified allows for characterization of some of the current clinical, professional, financial, and systemic challenges to biopsychosocial treatment, with the aim of helping identify possible directions for future research. CONCLUSION: Implementation of biopsychosocial treatment, though mandated by process-of-care guidelines, may be limited in the field of sexual health owing to resource limitations, limitations in physician training curricula, and structural obstacles preventing interdisciplinary collaboration. Nonetheless, a number of current treatment developments are biopsychosocially integrative, and a number of established models are biopsychosocially informed. These models and concrete strategies may provide a way forward for developing further initiatives to advance BPS treatment.

Historical revolutions in sex therapy: a critical examination of men's sexual dysfunctions and their treatment.

History, recent and ancient, presents innumerable methods intended to ensure or restore male sexual performance. Although these methods have regularly claimed to be "revolutionary," they have often been remarkably similar, and of questionably efficacy. This article provides a critical account of key historical trends in the treatment of male sexual dysfunctions in order to contextualize and critique the current treatment field. The author uses historical analysis to contextualize contemporary sex therapy techniques, arguing that even clinically verified contemporary revolutions, such as the advent of Viagra and similar drugs, may not present broadly efficacious standalone cures. Using critical historical analysis to illustrate the limitations of single-method treatments, the article argues for the value of comprehensive, biopsychosocial therapy methods. A common tendency--to seek a 'magic bullet' solution to sexual dysfunctions--is apparent throughout history, the author argues. While Viagra differs biomedically from historical treatments, it may appeal to the same logic, raising the question of whether it constitutes a truly revolutionary development in treatment. The article concludes with a set of recommendations regarding the implementation of biopsychosocial practice in sex therapy.