Acceptability of the menstrual cup among students in further education institutions in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa

'You don't have to sleep with a man to get how to survive': Girl's perceptions of an intervention study aimed at improving sexual and reproductive health and schooling outcomes

In sub-Saharan Africa, girls suffer from high rates of morbidity and mortality, enduring high exposure to sexual and reproductive health harms. Staying in school helps protect girls from such harms. Focus group discussions were conducted in a rural, impoverished area of Kenya with adolescent girls participating in a 4-arm cluster randomised controlled trial, evaluating menstrual cups, cash transfer, or combined cups plus cash transfer against controls. To explore girls' perceptions of how trial interventions affected their SRH risks and schooling, semi-structured discussions were held at baseline, midline, and study end. Data was explored using thematic analysis. At baseline there were no discernible differences between the 4 intervention groups regarding their perceptions of relationships with boys/men, and difficulties attending or remaining in school. Midline and endline discussions found that narratives from those receiving cash transfer only, or alongside a cup were similar; girls noted fewer pregnancies and less school dropout, attributed to the cash transfer reducing the need for transactional sex. Lower absenteeism was reported by the cup only group, with perceived minimal effect on pregnancy and dropout. Girls in control and cup only groups described feeling valued through inclusion, benefitting from puberty and hygiene education. Although seemingly having little effect on reducing pregnancy or dropout, these inputs reportedly empowered girls, whilst cash transfer girls were emboldened to refuse male sexual advances. Girls noticed benefits from trial interventions, with a reduction in transactional sex and resulting pregnancy impacting on school dropout, or reduced menstrual related absenteeism. Education and study inclusion were perceived as important. Future programmes should consider alleviating material deprivation which prevents girls from attending or performing at school through schemes such as cash transfer, alongside hygiene and education packages. This will empower girls to refuse unwanted sex and understand risks, in addition to motivating academic achievement and school completion. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03051789.

In Vitro Study to Assess Effective Cleaning Techniques for Removing Staphylococcus aureus from Menstrual Cups

Background: We sought to determine the effectiveness of common cleaning procedures in eliminating S. aureus from silicone menstrual cups. Methods: In this in vitro study, we tested four cleaning techniques: (1) cold water; (2) cold water and liquid soap; (3) cold water followed by steeping the cup in boiled water for 5 min in a ceramic mug covered with a small plate; and (4) cold water and soap followed by steeping the cup in boiled water as in (3). Human blood was coated to the inner and outer surface of each cup, dried, and incubated with 10⁶S. aureus colony-forming units (CFU/mL). All tests were performed in triplicate. Viable bacterial abundance was measured with decadic dilution and drop plate or surface plating. Results: Bacteria were most effectively eliminated by cleaning cups with soap and water and then steeping in boiled water (0 CFU/cup vs. 2.075 × 10⁸/cup no cleaning, p = 0.005). This was not statistically significantly different from washing cups with water only and steeping 5 min in boiled water (14 CFU/cup). Raised lettering on the outer surface of the menstrual cups resulted in more bacterial recovery from pieces with lettering than without lettering. Conclusions: These results advance knowledge of between-period menstrual cup cleaning recommendations, suggesting that the logistical challenges of continuous boiling may be eliminated with steeping at least 5 min.

Exploring menstrual products: A systematic review and meta-analysis of reusable menstrual pads for public health internationally

BACKGROUND

Girls and women need effective, safe, and affordable menstrual products. Single-use menstrual pads and tampons are regularly provided by agencies among resource-poor populations. Reusable menstrual pads (RMPs: fabric layers sewn together by an enterprise for manufacture of menstrual products) may be an effective alternative.

METHODS

For this review (PROSPERO CRD42020179545) we searched databases (inception to November 1, 2020) for quantitative and qualitative studies that reported on leakage, acceptability, or safety of RMPs. Findings were summarised or combined using forest plots (random-effects meta-analysis). Potential costs and environmental savings associated with RMPs were estimated.

RESULTS

A total of 44 studies were eligible (~14,800 participants). Most were conducted in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC, 78%), and 20% in refugee settings. The overall quality of studies was low. RMP uptake in cohort studies ranged from 22-100% (12 studies). One Ugandan trial among schoolgirls found leakage with RMPs was lower (44.4%, n = 72) compared to cloths (78%, n = 111, p<0.001). Self-reported skin-irritation was 23.8% after 3 months among RMP-users in a Ugandan cohort in a refugee setting (n = 267), compared to 72.8% at baseline with disposable pad use. There were no objective reports on infection. Challenges with washing and changing RMP were reported in LMIC studies, due to lack of water, privacy, soap, buckets, and sanitation/drying facilities. Among 69 brands, the average price for an RMP was $8.95 (standard deviation [sd] $5.08; LMIC $2.06, n = 10, high-income countries [HIC] $10.11), with a mean estimated lifetime of 4.3 years (sd 2.3; LMIC 2.9, n = 11; HIC 4.9 years, n = 23). In 5-year cost-estimates, in LMICs, 4-25 RMPs per period would be cheaper (170-417 US$) than 9-25 single-use pads, with waste-savings of ~600-1600 single-use pads. In HICs, 4-25 RMPs would be cheaper (33-245 US$) compared to 20 single-use tampons per period, with waste-savings of ~1300 tampons.

CONCLUSION

RMPs are used internationally and are an effective, safe, cheaper, and environmentally friendly option for menstrual product provision by programmes. Good quality studies in this field are needed.

Comparison between menstrual cups: first step to categorization and improved safety

OBJECTIVES

Menstrual cups come in a range of shapes, sizes, and firmnesses, but unlike tampons are not categorized in any way. With these factors having an impact on product leaks and comfort, as well as being linked to illness and injury, women need the same level of transparency when purchasing a menstrual cup. The comparison of physical and mechanical properties of menstrual cups will be the first step to achieve this.

METHODS

In October 2020, 14 popular and highly rated menstrual cups underwent quantitative comparison in laboratory settings (the United Kingdom), and they were compared in terms of their dimensions, volume, and compressive strength (firmness) using the Instron Universal Testing System. The overall designs were compared including shape, material, and features.

RESULTS

Although all the products in this comparison were marketed to women below 30 years of age having never given birth, total volume varied from 18.88 mL to 38.14 mL, and compressive load to compress the menstrual cup 50% (±0.5%) maximum diameter varied from 3.39 N to 13.92 N.

CONCLUSIONS

Women are not sufficiently informed when choosing a menstrual cup. With no correlation between menstrual cup size, shape, and its volume, or material, shape, and its firmness, consumers cannot estimate which menstrual cup might be most suitable, and incorrect choice could cause injury. Transparency is needed across menstrual cup brands. With this and further regulation, women will make an informed decision to choose the correct menstrual cup and minimize injury. This work recommends firmness categories, ranging from 'very soft' to 'very firm' as a first step.