Validity of the patient-reported Clinical Global Impression of Change as a measure of treatment response in men with premature ejaculation

Introduction: The Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGIC) measures have high utility in clinical practice. However, it is unknown whether the CGIC is valued for assessing premature ejaculation (PE) symptoms and/or the relationship between CGIC and other validated PE patient-reported measures.

Aim: The study aims to assess the validity of the patient-reported CGIC measure in men with PE and to examine the relationship between CGIC ratings and assessments of control, satisfaction, personal distress, and interpersonal difficulty.

Methods: Data from a randomized, double-blind, 24-week phase 3 trial in 1,162 men with PE who received dapoxetine (30 mg or 60 mg) or placebo on demand provided the basis for the analysis. Patients were ≥18 years, in a stable monogamous relationship for ≥6 months, met the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-Fourth Edition-Text Revision criteria for PE for ≥6 months, and had an intravaginal ejaculatory latency time (IELT) ≤2 minutes in ≥75% of intercourse episodes.

Main outcome measures: The CGIC asked patients to rate improvement or worsening of their PE compared with the start of the study using a 7-point response scale; other patient-reported measures were control over ejaculation, satisfaction with sexual intercourse, interpersonal difficulty, and personal distress related to ejaculation. Stopwatch-measured IELT was recorded. Associations between CGIC and change in other measures at study end point were assessed.

Results: The magnitude of IELT increased for each category of improvement on the CGIC: 1.63, 4.03, and 7.15 minutes for slightly better, better, and much better, respectively. Higher CGIC ratings were correlated with greater improvement in control (r = 0.73), satisfaction (r = 0.62), greater reduction in distress (r = -0.52), and interpersonal difficulty (r = -0.39). Total variance accounted for was 57.4%: control (48.7%), satisfaction (4.5%), IELT (2.8%), and distress (1.15%).

Conclusions: The analyses support the validity of the CGIC measure in men with PE. The CGIC can provide clinicians in practice with a valid and brief outcome assessment of their patient's condition.