ArticleThe Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology2025
Menstrual cup acceptability and functionality in real-world use: A cross-sectional survey of young people in Australia.
Article in The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07137663 (Investigation of the Use of Menstrual Cups in the Menstrual Health and Hygiene Management of Women Using Wheelchairs), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Investigation of the Use of Menstrual Cups in the Menstrual Health and Hygiene Management of Women Using Wheelchairs
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Developing a Community-Based Model for the Adoption of Sustainable Menstrual Products Among Adolescent Girls: Protocol for a 2-Phase Interventional Feasibility Study.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Female Menstrual Cup Causing Renal Colic, Hydronephrosis, and Ureteral Stricture: A Case Report.Clinical practice and cases in emergency medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMenstrual cups offer a cost-effective and environmentally sustainable product for many young people. While clinical trials have shown their safety and effectiveness, no studies have investigated their performance in real-world use.
aimsTo describe the acceptability and functionality (continuation, discomforts, leakage, and adverse events) of menstrual cups and investigate the supportive role of product knowledge. MATERIALS AND
methodsA cross-sectional online survey of 530 people aged 15-24 living in Australia who had ever used a menstrual cup, recruited via a menstrual cycle tracking application.
resultsMore than half of participants (55%) were still using their first menstrual cup at the time of the survey, 16% had switched to an alternative cup, and 29% had discontinued use. In their first cycle of use, 54% of participants reported leakage and 25% reported pain or discomfort with the cup in place. Many participants (45%) reported being unable to remove the cup on their first attempt, with subsequently 17% requiring help to remove it, and 2% reported displacement of an intra-uterine device during removal. These figures decreased for subsequent cycles. Half of the participants were aware prior to using a cup that different cup models may offer a better fit for different individuals. This knowledge was associated with decreased odds of needing help to remove the cup (adjusted odds ratio 0.57, 95% CI 0.35-0.94) or discontinuing use (adjusted relative risk ratio 0.66, 95% CI 0.44-1.00).
conclusionsDifficulties using menstrual cups are common in real-world use and higher than reported in clinical trials. Improved education provision may support more positive user experiences.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.