ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The menstrual cup is a safe, cost-effective, and environmentally friendly menstrual product which is increasing in usage, especially in younger women. The potential risk for concomitant menstrual cup use to increase IUD expulsion has been raised over the last 10 years, however, few studies assess this. This systematic review aims to identify, appraise and synthesize the current specific evidence on menstrual cup use and risk of partial or total IUD expulsion. METHODS: PubMed, and the Cochrane Library were searched for publications available in English, until February 20th, 2021. Quantitative and qualitative studies, systematic reviews and case series reports were included. Websites of menstrual cup manufacturers LenaCup®, DivaCup®, Lunette®, AllMatters® and Saalt® were searched for warnings relevant to IUD expulsion. RESULTS: Seven studies were included in this review, comprising 73 partial or total IUD expulsion events in patients with IUD contraception using menstrual cups. The case study reports included two individuals who each experienced two and three expulsions respectively. Of the seven publications, three reported expulsion rates of 3.7%, 17.3% and 18.6%. Time to expulsion ranged from less than one week to two and a half years. These three studies disagree on whether there is a statistically significant association between menstrual cup use and IUD expulsion. CONCLUSION: There is a possible association between menstrual cup use and increased risk of IUD expulsion and this information should be shared with patients. However evidence is scarce and high-quality randomised controlled trials are needed to address this risk and the impact of factors such as age, menstrual cup removal technique, pelvic anatomy, IUD type, and measures such as cutting the IUD strings short or delaying menstrual cup use for a period post-insertion. This research gap is limiting patients' ability to make informed choices regarding intrauterine contraception and menstrual management and must urgently be addressed in the context of rising IUD and menstrual cup use, particularly among a younger demographic who are seeking highly effective contraception.
ABSTRACT
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.
Subject(s)
Menstrual Hygiene Products , Menstruation , Female , HumansABSTRACT
Objetivos: hacer una aproximación a la prevalencia de vaginosis bacteriana (VB) en mujeres en Latinoamérica y explorar la asociación entre el tipo de hábitos higiénicos y prácticas sexuales con la presencia de este diagnóstico. Metodología: estudio de corte transversal en mujeres de 10 países de Latinoamérica entre los 16 y 49 años, vida sexual activa y ciclos menstruales. Se excluyeron las mujeres que presentaban otro tipo de infección vaginal, en gestación o en puerperio, con incapacidad para responder la encuesta o con cambio de pareja sexual en el último trimestre. Igualmente, se realizó muestreo por conveniencia de 1.000 mujeres. Se presenta la prevalencia de punto de VB. Se aplicó una encuesta que contenía información sociodemográfica, información sobre actividad sexual e higiene íntima y se hizo el diagnóstico presuntivo de vaginosis bacteriana basado en criterios clínicos y de laboratorio. Se evalúa la asociación entre VB, los hábitos higiénicos y prácticas sexuales por medio del OR y su intervalos de confianza del 95%. Resultados: la prevalencia de VB fue del 40% en las pacientes encuestadas. Se encontró asociación con el uso de alcohol y tabaco. Como actores protectores se identificaron el lavarse las manos después de orinar o defecar (OR=0,32; IC95%, 0,16-0,63); utilizar una técnica adecuada de aseo genital (OR=0,55; IC95%, 0,41-0,74) el uso de jabón en forma líquida (OR=0,62; IC95%, 0,46-0,84) y el uso de un jabón exclusivo para el área genital (OR=0,56; IC95%, 0,42-0,75). Como factores de riesgo se encontraron el uso de tampón (OR=3,00; IC95%,1,88-4,80), tener relaciones sexuales durante el período menstrual (OR=1,46; IC95%, 1,03-2,07) y usar lubricantes durante el coito (OR=1,68; IC 95%, 1,07-2,64). Conclusión: la prevalencia de VB es similar a la previamente informada en Latinoamérica. Su frecuencia esta asociada a los hábitos higiénicos y prácticas sexuales.
Objectives: presenting an approximation to bacterial vaginosis (BV) prevalence in Latin America and exploring the association between types of hygienic habits and sexual practices presented along with such diagnosis. Methodology: this was an epidemiological survey of women aged 16 to 49 from ten Latin-American countries who had active sexual lives and menstrual cycles. Females having another type of vaginal infection, pregnant females or those in puerperium, those unable to fill in the survey or who had changed their sexual partner during the last three-month period were excluded. 1,000 females were included by convenience sampling. The survey revealed BV prevalence; it had and provided data about presumptive diagnosis of BV, sociodemographic data, information about sexual activity, physical grooming, genital hygiene, underwear, intimate and menstrual hygiene and protection related to sexual activity. A presumptive diagnosis of BV was based on clinical and laboratory criteria. The association between BV and the females hygienic habits and sexual practices was evaluated by means of OR and 95% confidence intervals. Results: 40% of the surveyed patients had BV. An association was found between BV and alcohol and tobacco use. Washing hands before and after urinating or defecating (OR=0.32; 0.16-0.63 95%CI), using a suitable genital washing technique (vulva to anus) (OR=0.55; 0.41-0.74 95%CI), using liquid soap (OR=0.62; 0.46-0.84 95%CI) and soap just for the genital area (OR=0.56; 0.42-0.75 95%CI) were found to be protection-inducing factors. Hygienic habits explored as being risk factors for BV included tampon use (OR=3.00; 1.88-4.80 95%CI), having sexual relations during the menstrual period (OR=1.46; 1.03-2.07 95%CI) and using lubricants during coitus (OR=1.68; 1.07-2.64 95%CI). Conclusion: BV prevalence was found to be similar to that previously reported for Latin-America. Such frequency was found to be associated with hygienic habits and sexual practices.
