Back

Factors Affecting Menstrual Hygiene Among Slum Women In Budanilkantha Municipality, Kathmandu

Niraula, B. L.; Acharya, A.; Phuyal, M.; Marasini, B.; Acharya, P.

2025-10-28 sexual and reproductive health
10.1101/2025.10.26.25338843 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundMenstruation is often stigmatized and poorly managed in low-income settings like Nepal, leading to health and social challenges. Women in urban slums face additional barriers due to poverty and limited sanitation. This study explores factors affecting menstrual hygiene practices among women in Budanilkantha slums to inform targeted interventions. MethodsA cross-sectional study was conducted among 247 women aged 18-49 years in slum areas of Budanilkantha Municipality, Nepal. Participants were selected using systematic random sampling. Data were collected via a pretested questionnaire and analysed with chi-square tests. Ethical approval was obtained from Nobel College, Pokhara University. ResultsAmong the 247 women surveyed, 53.8% used sanitary pads while 42.9% used cloth during menstruation. Most practiced handwashing with soap and water (66.8%) and cleaned external genitalia similarly (82.6%), but only 38.9% bathed daily during menstruation. Nearly all participants (95.1%) experienced menstrual restrictions, with 57.1% perceived as "impure." Awareness of menstruation before menarche was reported by 65.6%, and higher education and income were significantly associated with better awareness and hygiene practices. ConclusionsMenstrual hygiene practices in Budanilkanthas slum areas are influenced by socio-economic status, cultural taboos, and limited infrastructure. Although basic hygiene is practiced by many, cultural stigma and gaps in hygiene behaviours persist. Comprehensive interventions addressing education, WASH infrastructure, and social norms are essential to improve menstrual health and dignity among marginalized women.

Matching journals

The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.