PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 7641929

Menses cup evaluation study.

M Cheng·R Kung·M Hannah·D Wilansky·J Shime
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the menses cup is well tolerated by menstruating women. DESIGN: Prospective descriptive clinical study. SETTING: Normal human volunteers in an academic research environment. PARTICIPANTS: Fifty-one menstruating women recruited between June to December 1991. INTERVENTIONS: Each participant was provided with two menses cups and an instruction sheet. Baseline information, including age, occupation, martial status, parity, description of menstrual flow, and current method used to cope with menstrual flow was collected. Subjects were asked to describe their experience with the cup at 1-, 2-, 6-, and 12-month intervals. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The proportion of women who found the cup acceptable. RESULTS: The cup was used by 51 subjects for a total of 159 cycles. Overall, 23 women (45%) found the cup an acceptable method for coping with menses. Among 29 (57%) women who used the cup for two or more cycles, 62% found it acceptable. CONCLUSION: The menses cup may be an acceptable method for some women for coping with menstrual flow.

Explore related subjects

Equipment and SuppliesFemaleHumansMenorrhagiaProspective StudiesUterine HemorrhageClinical TrialJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

M Cheng, R Kung, M Hannah, D Wilansky, J Shime. 1995. Menses cup evaluation study.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7641929/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2026

An impact assessment of the European medical device regulations implementation - the current status quo.

BACKGROUND: This research aims to assess the current impact of the medical and in-vitro diagnostic devices regulations (MDR/IVDR) on the device industry in the EU, under the lens of postimplementation and the amending regulation, and in advance of the final transition to the IVDR/MDR in the future. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A quantitative survey was administered to a diverse cohort of medical device enterprises, ranging from micro to large organizations. RESULTS: The survey indicates that the MDR/IVDR has harmed innovation, leading many manufacturers to seek initial device approval and launch elsewhere before in Europe. There is evidence that some manufacturers have rationalized their existing product portfolios and removed devices from the market as they stated they would in previous industry surveys. The MDR/IVDR has been shown to negatively impact manufacturers, with increased costs related to notified body (NB) fees, maintaining and updating documentation, recertification fees, and hiring additional staff. CONCLUSION: This study provides a current status of the effects of MDR/IVDR on manufacturers and finds that despite amending regulations and other interventions taken by the EU to mitigate regulatory burden, ensure product availability, and address stakeholder concerns, the EU is no longer the market of choice for new products.

Equipment and Supplies↗