Abstract Introduction/Aim Male sexual issues often emerge in diverse clinical settings, yet patients’ narratives may vary significantly depending on the specialty of the attending professional. This study aims to discuss, from clinical practice, how the interdisciplinary approach between Psychology and Urology allows the identification of psychosocial and contextual aspects that are frequently not disclosed during initial consultations. Methods The proposal stems from the shared clinical practice of a psychologist and four urologists who maintain regular referrals between disciplines. Clinical cases of young and adult men presenting various sexual complaints were qualitatively analyzed, focusing on differences between the initial medical consultation and subsequent psychotherapeutic follow-up. Results Emotional, relational, and social factors (such as psychoactive substance use, experiences of infidelity, or identity conflicts) were often disclosed only after the establishment of a therapeutic alliance in psychotherapy. The traditional model of care, centered solely on organic complaints or biomedical diagnosis, proved insufficient to fully capture the complexity of sexual suffering. Ongoing, non-hierarchical dialogue between professionals was decisive in broadening both the listening process and therapeutic possibilities. Conclusions Building an interdisciplinary (rather than merely multidisciplinary) model of care is essential for the effective management of male sexual complaints and dysfunctions. Only through ethical, clinical, and dialogical collaboration among professionals is it possible to develop interventions that address the subject in an integral and contextualized manner. Financing No conflict.
Bonato et al. (Sun,) studied this question.