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...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Hannah Manley, John A Hunt, Lívia Santos, Philip Breedon
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	SAGE Publishing 2021
Materias:	Medicine R
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/e12422ebce5b4de3af903ff1997586c1
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:e12422ebce5b4de3af903ff1997586c1
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:e12422ebce5b4de3af903ff1997586c12021-11-21T01:34:16ZComparison between menstrual cups: first step to categorization and improved safety1745-506510.1177/17455065211058553https://doaj.org/article/e12422ebce5b4de3af903ff1997586c12021-11-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1177/17455065211058553https://doaj.org/toc/1745-5065Objectives: 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.Hannah ManleyJohn A HuntLívia SantosPhilip BreedonSAGE PublishingarticleMedicineRENWomen's Health, Vol 17 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R
spellingShingle	Medicine R Hannah Manley John A Hunt Lívia Santos Philip Breedon Comparison between menstrual cups: first step to categorization and improved safety
description	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.
format	article
author	Hannah Manley John A Hunt Lívia Santos Philip Breedon
author_facet	Hannah Manley John A Hunt Lívia Santos Philip Breedon
author_sort	Hannah Manley
title	Comparison between menstrual cups: first step to categorization and improved safety
title_short	Comparison between menstrual cups: first step to categorization and improved safety
title_full	Comparison between menstrual cups: first step to categorization and improved safety
title_fullStr	Comparison between menstrual cups: first step to categorization and improved safety
title_full_unstemmed	Comparison between menstrual cups: first step to categorization and improved safety
title_sort	comparison between menstrual cups: first step to categorization and improved safety
publisher	SAGE Publishing
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/e12422ebce5b4de3af903ff1997586c1
work_keys_str_mv	AT hannahmanley comparisonbetweenmenstrualcupsfirststeptocategorizationandimprovedsafety AT johnahunt comparisonbetweenmenstrualcupsfirststeptocategorizationandimprovedsafety AT liviasantos comparisonbetweenmenstrualcupsfirststeptocategorizationandimprovedsafety AT philipbreedon comparisonbetweenmenstrualcupsfirststeptocategorizationandimprovedsafety
_version_	1718419395085074432

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

Ejemplares similares