Bradley W E
Urology. 1987 Apr;29(4):383-8. doi: 10.1016/0090-4295(87)90501-2.
Two new methods of evaluating erectile function were compared and contrasted in a series of 41 patients complaining of impotence. The first method consisted of a single measurement of maximum rigidity at penile base and along the penile shaft utilizing Snap-Gauges. The second method consisted of simultaneous continuous monitoring of penile tumescence and rigidity of the penile base and shaft. The results demonstrated concurrence of interpretation of both techniques. However, whereas the results of Snap-Gauge testing clearly distinguished between organic and psychogenic impotence, continuous penile rigidity monitoring usually delineated the nature of the penile erectile abnormality.
在一系列41名主诉阳痿的患者中，对两种评估勃起功能的新方法进行了比较和对比。第一种方法是使用快速测量仪单次测量阴茎根部和阴茎体部的最大硬度。第二种方法是同时连续监测阴茎勃起度以及阴茎根部和体部的硬度。结果表明两种技术的解释结果一致。然而，虽然快速测量仪测试结果能清楚地区分器质性阳痿和心因性阳痿，但连续阴茎硬度监测通常能描绘出阴茎勃起异常的性质。
