Background: Females in low and middle income countries (LMICs) have difficulty coping with menstrual needs, but few studies have examined the social or health implications of these needs.Methods: Responses from 3418 menstruating females aged 13–29 years were extracted from an HIV and behavioral risks cross-sectional survey conducted in rural western Kenya. We examined sanitary products used, provision of products from sexual partners or from transactional sex, and demographic and sexual exposures.Results: Overall, 75% of females reported using commercial pads and 25% used traditional materials such as cloth or items like paper or tissue, with 10% of girls <15 years old depending on makeshift items. Two-thirds of females with no education relied on traditional items. Having attended secondary school increased the odds of using commercial pads among married (adjusted odds ratios [AOR] 4.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.25–7.12) and single females (AOR 2.17, 95% CI 1.04–4.55). Married females had lower odds of pad use if they reported early (<12 years of age) compared with later (≥18 years) sexual debut (64% vs. 78%, AOR 0.45, 95% CI 0.21–0.97). Two-thirds of pad users received them from sexual partners. Receipt was lower among married females if partners were violent (AOR 0.67, 95% CI 0.53–0.85). Receipt among single females was higher if they had two or more sexual partners in the past year (AOR 2.11, 95% CI 1.04–4.29). Prevalence of engaging in sex for money to buy pads was low (1.3%); however, 10% of 15-year-olds reported this, with girls ≤15 having significantly higher odds compared with females over 15 (AOR 2.84, 95% CI 0.89–9.11). The odds of having transactional sex for pads was higher among females having two or more partners in the past 12 months (AOR 4.86, 95% CI 2.06–11.43).Conclusions: Menstrual needs of impoverished females in rural LMICs settings likely leads to increased physical and sexual harms. Studies are required to strengthen knowledge and to evaluate interventions to reduce these harms.

BackgroundImportant differences have been demonstrated in laboratory parameters from healthy persons in different geographical regions and populations, mostly driven by a combination of genetic, demographic, nutritional, and environmental factors. Despite this, European and North American derived laboratory reference intervals are used in African countries for patient management, clinical trial eligibility, and toxicity determination; which can result in misclassification of healthy persons as having laboratory abnormalities.MethodsAn observational prospective cohort study known as the Kisumu Incidence Cohort Study (KICoS) was conducted to estimate the incidence of HIV seroconversion and identify determinants of successful recruitment and retention in preparation for an HIV vaccine/prevention trial among young adults and adolescents in western Kenya. Laboratory values generated from the KICoS were compared to published region-specific reference intervals and the 2004 NIH DAIDS toxicity tables used for the trial.ResultsAbout 1106 participants were screened for the KICoS between January 2007 and June 2010. Nine hundred and fifty-three participants aged 16 to 34 years, HIV-seronegative, clinically healthy, and non-pregnant were selected for this analysis. Median and 95% reference intervals were calculated for hematological and biochemistry parameters. When compared with both published region-specific reference values and the 2004 NIH DAIDS toxicity table, it was shown that the use of locally established reference intervals would have resulted in fewer participants classified as having abnormal hematological or biochemistry values compared to US derived reference intervals from DAIDS (10% classified as abnormal by local parameters vs. >40% by US DAIDS). Blood urea nitrogen was most often out of range if US based intervals were used: <10% abnormal by local intervals compared to >83% by US based reference intervals.ConclusionDifferences in reference intervals for hematological and biochemical parameters between western and African populations highlight importance of developing local reference intervals for clinical care and trials in Africa.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text