Back

Bridging the Awareness Utilisation Gap in Reusable Menstrual Product Use Among Female Medical Students and Healthcare Professionals: A Cross-Sectional Study

Wami-Amadi, C. F.; Nonju, I. I.

2026-04-12 sexual and reproductive health
10.64898/2026.04.10.26350626 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background: Reusable menstrual products provide sustainable and cost effective alternatives to disposable sanitary products; however, their adoption remains limited, even among healthcare professionals. Objectives: To assess awareness, knowledge, perceptions, and utilisation of reusable menstrual products among female medical students and healthcare professionals, and to identify predictors of willingness and use. Design: Cross sectional analytical study. Setting: An online survey was conducted among female medical students and healthcare professionals in Nigeria. Participants: A total of 203 female respondents aged 15 to 55 years. Intervention: Not applicable. Primary Outcome Measures: Utilisation of reusable menstrual products and willingness to adopt their use. Secondary Outcome Measures: Awareness, knowledge, perceptions, and barriers. Methods: Data were collected using a structured questionnaire and analysed using descriptive statistics, chi square tests, and logistic regression. Results: Awareness was high (96.06%), but utilisation was low, with 5.42% ever using and 4.43% currently using reusable products. About 31.53% were willing to use them. Respondent type was not associated with willingness (p = 0.735), although healthcare professionals had higher knowledge (p = 0.024). Positive perception predicted willingness (AOR = 7.58, 95% CI: 3.18 to 18.03, p < 0.001). Good knowledge (AOR = 14.96, p = 0.014) and increasing age (AOR = 1.28, p = 0.004) predicted utilisation. Conclusion: Despite high awareness, utilisation remains low. Perception influences willingness, while knowledge drives use. Targeted behavioural and educational interventions are needed. Keywords: Menstrual hygiene, reusable menstrual products, menstrual cup, sustainability, healthcare professionals

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 2%
33.5%
2
PLOS Global Public Health
293 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
10.3%
3
Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology
98 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
6.5%
50% of probability mass above
4
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 16%
6.5%
5
Cureus
67 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
6.4%
6
Archives of Clinical and Biomedical Research
28 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.6%
7
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.6%
8
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
20 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
9
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
10
Frontiers in Microbiology
375 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.7%
11
BMC Infectious Diseases
118 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
12
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.7%
13
BMJ Global Health
98 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
14
Microbiology Spectrum
435 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
15
Nature Human Behaviour
85 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
16
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 11%
0.9%
17
Antibiotics
32 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
18
Peer Community Journal
254 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
19
Tropical Medicine & International Health
15 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.8%
20
BMC Biology
248 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
21
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 16%
0.7%
22
The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
60 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
23
Viruses
318 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.7%
24
Journal of Hospital Infection
27 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.5%
25
PLOS Digital Health
91 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.5%