Exploring Vacuum Erection Device User Feedback: A GPT-4 Thematic Analysis - 06/06/25

Résumé |
Objective |
To explore consumer viewpoints regarding vacuum erection device (VED) use.
Methods |
We conducted a qualitative analysis of 1500 Amazon.com reviews for 21 of the most popular VED products. Reviews were analyzed using GPT-4, identifying common themes and subthemes. Electric and manual VEDs were compared, and a multivariable ordinal regression was built to identify factors linked to higher product ratings.
Results |
The most common themes identified were efficacy (92%) and user experience (78%). Safety and warning mentions appeared in 27% and 6.8% of reviews, respectively. Compared to manual, electric VEDs were more frequently associated with mentions of ease of use (46% vs 34%), design features (17% vs 9.3%), and explicit product warnings (7.7% vs 5.1%). A 5/5 rating was linked to fewer mentions of product deficiency (7.3% vs 86%), malfunction (1.5% vs 45%), product warnings (2.8% vs 24%), and customer service issues (3.9% vs 21%) compared to a 1/5 rating. Among all reviews, 126 (8.4%) reported using the VED for partner intimacy, while 16 (1.1%) noted its use for masturbation. Within this cohort, 65% used devices with included sex toys, and 35% used standard VEDs. Users seeking partner intimacy reported similar effectiveness (93% vs 81%), ease of use (59% vs 54%), satisfaction (91% vs 95%), and likelihood of recommendation (30% vs 29%) between VEDs with and without sex toy features.
Conclusion |
Amazon reviews indicate a generally positive sentiment toward VEDs, with few mentions of malfunction or safety warnings. However, proper patient education remains essential to ensure safe use and minimize the risk of injury.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Plan
Vol 200
P. 216-222 - juin 2025 Retour au numéroBienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?
