Menstrual Practice Needs Scale (MPNS): Reliability and Validity of the Turkish Version

Vural, Pınar Irmak; Varışoğlu, Yeliz

doi:10.5152/cjms.2021-166-232

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It measures the extent to which respondents’ menstrual management practices and environments were perceived to meet their needs during their last period. The scale has demonstrated acceptable reliability and validity; Cronbach’s alpha value of 0.78, test-retest reliability coefficient or intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) ranging between 0.66 and 0.69, and content validity index of 0.89 [ 16 , 17 ].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Utilization of modern menstrual methods and related unmet needs among college going women in Coimbatore district: a descriptive cross-sectional study

Durairaj,

Aparnavi,

Narayanan

et al. 2024

BMC Women's Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives The primary objectives were to determine the proportion of modern menstrual method (MMM) users among college going women in Coimbatore district, Tamil Nadu; and to estimate the unmet needs associated with use of MMMs in comparison with other menstrual hygiene methods (MHMs). We also assessed the factors that determine MMM use among college going women. Methods This was a descriptive cross-sectional study conducted among college going women in Coimbatore district, Tamil Nadu, India between October 2022 and January 2023 using a purpose predesigned, pretested, semi-structured proforma that included validated Menstrual Practice Needs Scale (MPNS-36). Results Only 1.4% of the study participants used MMMs – menstrual cups (1.3%) and tampons (0.1%). Sanitary pads were the most common MHM of choice (96.3%); of which majority (98.6%) used disposable pads and more than half (50.4%) used non-biodegradable pads. Importantly, one in six (16.5%) were not aware of nature of sanitary pads (biodegradable or nonbiodegradable) used. The unmet needs associated with MMMs (menstrual cups and tampons) were significantly lower than that for other MHMs (including sanitary pads), in particular, the unmet material and home environment needs, unmet material reliability concerns, unmet reuse needs and unmet reuse insecurity. However, we found no significant difference between MMMs, sanitary pads and other MHMs in terms of unmet transport, college environment, change and disposal insecurity needs. The significant predictors of use of MMMs were age (more than 21 years of age), residence (urban), type of stay (off campus including home), socioeconomic status (upper), fathers’ and mothers’ education (high school and above), and presence of personal income. Discussions with friends (or peers) both before and after menarche regarding menstruation resulted in higher adoption of modern menstrual methods. Conclusion MMMs provided comparative advantage with lesser unmet needs for material reliability and reuse insecurity concerns, particularly in home environment. However, none of the MHMs fulfilled the user expectations for transport and disposal insecurity concerns, particularly outdoors.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Utilization of modern menstrual methods and related unmet needs among college going women in Coimbatore district: a descriptive cross-sectional study

Durairaj,

Aparnavi,

Narayanan

et al. 2024

BMC Women's Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The scale has demonstrated acceptable reliability and validity; Cronbach's alpha value of 0.78, test-retest reliability coe cient or intraclass correlation coe cient (ICC) ranging between 0.66 to 0.69, and content validity index of 0.89. (16,17) The data obtained using Google Forms was exported in Microsoft Excel format and analysed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) v27. Descriptive analysis was presented using numbers and percentages for categorical variables and mean (standard deviation) for continuous variables with appropriate graphs.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Utilization of Modern Menstrual Methods and related unmet needs among college going women in Coimbatore district: An analytical cross-sectional study

Durairaj,

Periyasamy,

Narayanan

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: The primary objectives were to determine the proportion of modern menstrual method (MMM) users among college going women in Coimbatore district, Tamil Nadu; and to estimate the unmet needs associated with use of MMMs in comparison with other menstrual hygiene methods (MHMs). We also assessed the factors that determine MMM use among college going women. Methods: This was an analytical cross-sectional study conducted among college going women in Coimbatore district, Tamil Nadu, India between October 2022 and January 2023 using a purpose predesigned, pretested, semi-structured proforma that included validated Menstrual Practice Needs Scale (MPNS-36). Results: Only 1.4% of the study participants used MMMs – menstrual cups (1.3%) and tampons (0.1%). Sanitary pads were the most common MHM of choice (96.3%); of which majority (98.6%) used disposable pads and more than half (50.4%) used non-biodegradable pads. Importantly, one in six (16.5%) were not aware of nature of sanitary pads (biodegradable or nonbiodegradable) used. The unmet needs associated with MMMs (menstrual cups and tampons) were significantly lower than that for other MHMs (including sanitary pads), in particular, the unmet material and home environment needs, unmet material reliability concerns, unmet reuse needs and unmet reuse insecurity. However, we found no significant difference between MMMs, sanitary pads and other MHMs in terms of unmet transport, college environment, change and disposal insecurity needs. The significant predictors of use of MMMs were age (more than 21 years of age), residence (urban), type of stay (off campus including home), socioeconomic status (upper), fathers’ and mothers’ education (high school and above), and presence of personal income. Discussions with friends (or peers) both before and after menarche regarding menstruation resulted in higher adoption of modern menstrual methods. Conclusion: MMMs provided comparative advantage with lesser unmet needs for material reliability and reuse insecurity concerns, particularly in home environment. However, none of the MHMs fulfilled the user expectations for transport and disposal insecurity concerns, particularly outdoors.

show abstract

“…[1,2] The Menstrual Practice Needs Scale (MPNS-36) [3] was published in 2020 to address this gap and has seen rapid uptake in research and practice. [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12] However, this comprehensive scale is 36-items in length, presenting a barrier to implementation in short needs assessments or multicomponent surveys. Stakeholders have requested a short form to enable greater uptake.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Menstrual Practice Needs Scale Short Form (MPNS-SF) and Rapid (MPNS-R): Development in Khulna, Bangladesh, and validation in cross-sectional surveys from Bangladesh and Uganda

Hennegan,

Hasan,

Jalil

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives. Develop and validate short and rapid forms of the 36-item Menstrual Practice Needs Scale (MPNS-36). Design. Item reduction prioritised content validity and was informed by cognitive interviews with schoolgirls in Bangladesh, performance of scale items in past research, and stakeholder feedback. The original MPNS-36 was revalidated, and short and rapid forms tested in a cross-sectional survey. This was followed by further tests of dimensionality, internal consistency, and validity in multiple cross-sectional surveys. Setting and participants. Short form (MPNS-SF) and rapid form (MPNS-R) measures were developed in a survey of 313 menstruating girls (mean age=13.51) in Khulna, Bangladesh. They were further tested in the baseline survey of the Adolescent Menstrual Experiences and Health Cohort, in Khulna, Bangladesh (891 menstruating girls, mean age=12.40); and the dataset from the MPNS-36 development in Soroti, Uganda (538 menstruating girls, mean age=14.49). Results. The 18-item short form reflects the six original subscales, with the four core subscales demonstrating good fit in all three samples (Khulna pilot: RMSEA=0.064 90%CI 0.043-0.084, CFI=.94, TLI=.92. Cohort baseline: RMSEA=0.050 90%CI 0.039-0.062, CFI=.96, TLI=.95. Uganda: RMSEA=0.039 90%CI 0.028-0.050, CFI=.95, TLI=.94). The 9-item rapid form captures diverse needs. A two-factor structure was the most appropriate but fell short of adequate fit (Khulna pilot: RMSEA=0.092 90%CI 0.000-0.158, CFI=.93, TLI=.89). Hypothesised associations between the MPNS scores and other constructs were comparable between the MPNS-36 and MPNS-SF in all populations, and replicated, with attenuation, in the MPNS-R. Internal consistency remained acceptable. Conclusions. The MPNS-SF offers a reliable and valid measure of adolescent girls' menstrual hygiene experience while reducing participant burden, to support implementation and improve measurement in menstrual health research. The MPNS-R provides a brief measure with poorer structural validity, suited to including menstrual health within broader water, sanitation and hygiene or sexual and reproductive health research.

show abstract

Menstrual Practice Needs Scale (MPNS): Reliability and Validity of the Turkish Version

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Utilization of modern menstrual methods and related unmet needs among college going women in Coimbatore district: a descriptive cross-sectional study

Utilization of modern menstrual methods and related unmet needs among college going women in Coimbatore district: a descriptive cross-sectional study

Utilization of Modern Menstrual Methods and related unmet needs among college going women in Coimbatore district: An analytical cross-sectional study

The Menstrual Practice Needs Scale Short Form (MPNS-SF) and Rapid (MPNS-R): Development in Khulna, Bangladesh, and validation in cross-sectional surveys from Bangladesh and Uganda

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About