Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

Online rehabilitation program for sexual minority prostate cancer patients shows acceptability but minimal functional improvementCan an online program help gay men recover sexual function after prostate cancer?

AI-generated summary of the cited source, checked by automated accuracy review. How we work

Key Takeaway
Consider that sexual accommodation with aids may be more realistic than functional rehabilitation for sexual minority prostate cancer patients.

A randomized controlled trial evaluated an online biopsychobehavioral rehabilitation program for 401 US sexual minority men who had been treated for prostate cancer and were experiencing sexual and/or urinary problems at baseline. The intervention included phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors, sexual aids, a pelvic floor exercise regimen with video, a guide to good gay sex following treatment, and coaching, compared to a control arm (not specified). The study assessed acceptability, feasibility, and efficacy at improving sexual and urinary function over 24 months.

The program demonstrated good acceptability and feasibility. However, only minimal improvement in sexual or urinary function was observed over time, and no differences were found between the treatment and control arms. Participants reported enduring usage and acceptability of specific components including sexual aids (vacuum pump, anal dilators, penile constriction rings), masturbation, and pelvic floor exercises.

Safety and tolerability data were not reported. The authors suggest that sexual 'accommodation,' rather than 'rehabilitation,' may be a more accurate and realistic goal for this population. While this RCT found no evidence that the intervention improved sexual or urinary outcomes, it highlights the importance of providing sexual aids to help patients accommodate their post-treatment challenges.

After prostate cancer treatment, many men face difficult sexual and urinary problems. For gay men, these challenges can feel especially isolating, with few resources tailored to their needs. A new study tested an online program built just for them, offering coaching, guides to good gay sex after treatment, pelvic floor exercises, and specific sexual aids like vacuum pumps and anal dilators.

The researchers followed 401 gay men in the U.S. who were dealing with these problems. They found the men liked the program and found it easy to use. Many reported they kept using the sexual aids and exercises long-term. But when it came to actually improving their sexual or urinary function, the results were disappointing. Over two years, the program led to only minimal improvement, and it didn't perform any better than the control group.

This means the online program, while acceptable, wasn't effective at fixing the core problems. The study's authors suggest that for this group, the goal might not be full 'rehabilitation' back to how things were before. Instead, a more realistic aim is 'accommodation'—helping men adapt to their new normal with practical tools and support. The trial found no differences between the program and the control, so we can't say it caused any functional improvement.

What this means for you:
A tailored online program was liked by gay men after prostate cancer, but it didn't improve their sexual or urinary function.

Study Details

Study typeRct
EvidenceLevel 2
Follow-up24.0 mo
PublishedApr 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
PURPOSE: Sexual minority prostate cancer patients have worse health-related quality of life outcomes than heterosexual patients. We conducted the first study to test whether sexual and urinary rehabilitation tailored for sexual minority patients was acceptable, feasible, and efficacious at improving their sexual and urinary function. METHODS: Restore-2 was a 24-month randomized controlled trial of an online biopsychobehavioral rehabilitation study for sexual minority men treated for prostate cancer experiencing sexual and/or urinary problems. Participants were 401 US sexual minority men treated for prostate cancer and experiencing sexual and/or urinary problems at baseline. Intervention components included phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors, sexual aids, a pelvic floor exercise regimen and video, a guide to good gay sex following treatment, and coaching. Quality of life assessments were completed at baseline, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. RESULTS: We confirmed good acceptability and feasibility, but only minimal improvement was observed over time and no differences were found between treatment and control arms. CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence that the intervention improved sexual or urinary outcomes for participants. However, we confirmed excellent acceptability and feasibility for a sexual rehabilitation program tailored to sexual minority participants. In addition, participants reported enduring usage and acceptability of sexual aids (including vacuum pump, anal dilators, and penile constriction rings) as well as masturbation and pelvic floor exercises to accommodate their sexual challenges. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Sexual "accommodation," rather than "rehabilitation," may be a more accurate and realistic goal for this population. Patients should be provided sexual aids to help accommodate their sexual and urinary challenges. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was retrospectively registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, study number: NCT03923582; date: 22/04/2019.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.