Assessing the effectiveness of a comprehensive menstrual health intervention program in Ugandan schools (MENISCUS): process evaluation of a pilot intervention study

Ruth Nalugya, Clare Tanton, Laura Hytti, Catherine Kansiime, Kevin Nakuya, Prossy Namirembe, Shamira Nakalema, Stella Neema, Connie Alezuyo, Saidat Namuli Musoke, Belen Torondel, Suzanna C Francis, David A Ross, Chris Bonell, Janet Seeley, Helen A Weiss, Ruth Nalugya, Clare Tanton, Laura Hytti, Catherine Kansiime, Kevin Nakuya, Prossy Namirembe, Shamira Nakalema, Stella Neema, Connie Alezuyo, Saidat Namuli Musoke, Belen Torondel, Suzanna C Francis, David A Ross, Chris Bonell, Janet Seeley, Helen A Weiss

Abstract

Background: Poor menstrual health and hygiene (MHH) is a globally recognised public health challenge. A pilot study of an MHH intervention was conducted in two secondary schools in Entebbe, Uganda, over 9 months. The intervention included five components delivered by the implementing partner (WoMena Uganda) and the research team: (i) training teachers to implement government guidelines for puberty education, (ii) a drama skit to reduce stigma about menstruation, (iii) training in use of a menstrual kit (including re-usable pads), (iv) guidance on pain relief methods including provision of analgesics and (v) improvements to school water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) facilities. The aim of the process evaluation was to examine implementation, context and possible causal pathways.

Methods: We collected information on fidelity, dose, reach, acceptability, context and mechanisms of impact using (i) quantitative survey data collected from female and male students in year 2 of secondary school (ages 13-21; 450 at the baseline and 369 at endline); (ii) qualitative data from 40 in-depth interviews with parents, teachers and female students, and four focus group discussions with students, stratified by gender; (iii) data from unannounced visits checking on WASH facilities throughout the study; and (iv) routine data collected as part of the implementation. Quantitative data were used primarily to assess fidelity, dose and reach. Qualitative data were used primarily to assess acceptability, context and possible mechanisms.

Results: Both schools received all intervention elements that were delivered by the research team and implementing partner. The drama skit, menstrual kit and pain management intervention components were delivered with fidelity. Intervention components that relied on school ownership (puberty education training and WASH improvements) were not fully delivered. Overall, the intervention was acceptable to participants. Multilevel contextual factors including schools' social and physical environment, and family, cultural and social factors influenced the acceptability of the intervention in the school setting. The intervention components reinforced one another, as suggested in our theoretical framework.

Conclusion: The intervention was feasible to deliver and acceptable to the schools and students. We propose a full-scale cluster-randomised trial to evaluate the intervention, adding a school-based MHH leadership group to address issues with school ownership.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04064736. Registered August 22, 2019, retrospectively registered.

Keywords: Acceptability; Dose; Fidelity; Menstrual health; Process evaluation; Reach; School-based intervention.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interestsThe authors declare that they have no competing interests.

© The Author(s) 2020.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Theoretical framework for the MENISCUS intervention. Green circles show the constructs of social cognitive theory that the intervention aims to work through, with details of the intervention components addressing these in the relevant circles. These work to increase self-efficacy for effective MHH. Expectations around effective MHH are also shown. The ultimate aim is for effective MHH to lead to improved school and class attendance during menses, but this is not evaluated in this pilot trial

References

    1. Sommer M, Hirsch JS, Nathanson C, Parker RG. Comfortably, safely, and without shame: defining menstrual hygiene management as a public health issue. Am J Public Health. 2015;105(7):1302–1311. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2014.302525.
    1. Hennegan J, Shannon AK, Rubli J, Hennegan J, Shannon AK, Rubli J. Women’s and girls’ experiences of menstruation in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review and qualitative metasynthesis. PLoS Med. 2019;16(5):e1002803. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002803.
    1. Sommer M, Sahin M. Overcoming the taboo: advancing the global agenda for menstrual hygiene management for schoolgirls. Am J Public Health. 2013;103(9):1556–1559. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2013.301374.
    1. van Eijk AM, Laserson KF, Nyothach E, Oruko K, Omoto J, Mason L, et al. Use of menstrual cups among school girls: longitudinal observations nested in a randomised controlled feasibility study in rural western Kenya. Reprod Health. 2018;15(1):139. doi: 10.1186/s12978-018-0582-8.
    1. Barro RJ, Lee JW. A new data set of educational attainment in the world, 1950–2010. J Dev Econ. 2013;104:184–198. doi: 10.1016/j.jdeveco.2012.10.001.
    1. Sumpter C, Torondel B. A systematic review of the health and social effects of menstrual hygiene management. PLoS One. 2013;8(4):e62004. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0062004.
    1. Elledge MF, Muralidharan A, Parker A, Ravndal KT, Siddiqui M, Toolaram AP, et al. Menstrual hygiene management and waste disposal in low and middle income countries-a review of the literature. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018;15(11):2562. doi: 10.3390/ijerph15112562.
    1. Hennegan J, Montgomery P. Do menstrual hygiene management interventions improve education and psychosocial outcomes for women and girls in low and middle income countries? A systematic review. PLoS One. 2016;11(2):e0146985. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0146985.
    1. Phillips-Howard PA, Nyothach E, Ter Kuile FO, Omoto J, Wang D, Zeh C, et al. Menstrual cups and sanitary pads to reduce school attrition, and sexually transmitted and reproductive tract infections: a cluster randomised controlled feasibility study in rural Western Kenya. BMJ Open. 2016;6(11):e013229. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013229.
    1. Miiro G, Rutakumwa R, Nakiyingi-Miiro J, Nakuya K, Musoke S, Namakula J, et al. Menstrual health and school absenteeism among adolescent girls in Uganda (MENISCUS): a feasibility study. BMC Womens Health. 2018;18(1):4. doi: 10.1186/s12905-017-0502-z.
    1. Kansiime C, Hytti L, Nalugya R, Nakuya K, Namirembe P, Nakalema S, et al. Menstrual health intervention and school attendance in Uganda (MENISCUS-2): a pilot intervention study. BMJ Open. 2020:031182. 2020 (in press).
    1. Linnan L, Steckler A. Process evaluation for public health interventions and research: an overview. In: Steckler A, Linnan L, editors. Process Evaluation for Public Health Interventions and Research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2002. pp. 1–23.
    1. WoMena Uganda: . Accessed February 4th 2020.
    1. Bandura A. Health promotion by social cognitive means. Health Educ Behav. 4/2004;31(2):143-164.
    1. Moore GF, Audrey S, Barker M, Bond L, Bonell C, Hardeman W, et al. Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2015;350:h1258. doi: 10.1136/bmj.h1258.
    1. Curry LA, Nembhard IM, Bradley EH. Qualitative and mixed methods provide unique contributions to outcomes research. Circulation. 2009;119(10):1442–1452. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.742775.
    1. Lewin S, Glenton C, Oxman AD. Use of qualitative methods alongside randomised controlled trials of complex healthcare interventions: methodological study. BMJ. 2009;339:b3496. doi: 10.1136/bmj.b3496.
    1. Munro A, Bloor M. Process evaluation: the new miracle ingredient in public health research? Qual Res. 2010;10(6):699–713. doi: 10.1177/1468794110380522.
    1. Sekhon M, Cartwright M, Francis JJ. Acceptability of healthcare interventions: an overview of reviews and development of a theoretical framework. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017;17(1):88. doi: 10.1186/s12913-017-2031-8.
    1. Ariza C, Villalbí J, Sánchez-Martínez F, Nebot M. Process evaluation in relation to effectiveness assessment: experiences with school-based programs. Gac Sanit. 2011;25(Supl 1):32–39. doi: 10.1016/S0213-9111(11)70006-1.
    1. Alam M-U, Luby SP, Halder AK, Islam K, Opel A, Shoab AK, et al. Menstrual hygiene management among Bangladeshi adolescent schoolgirls and risk factors affecting school absence: results from a cross-sectional survey. BMJ Open. 2017;7(7):e015508. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-015508.
    1. Adams J, Bartram, J., Chartier, Y., & Sims, J. Water, sanitation and hygiene standards for schools in low-cost settings. WHO, Geneva. . 2009. Accessed February 4th 2020.
    1. Saboori S, Mwaki A, Porter S, Okech B, Freeman M, Rheingans R. Sustaining school hand washing and water treatment programmes: lessons learned and to be learned. Waterlines. 2011;30(4):298–311. doi: 10.3362/1756-3488.2011.040.
    1. Alexander K, Dreibelbis R, Freeman M, Ojeny R, Rheingans R. Improving service delivery of water, sanitation, and hygiene in primary schools: a cluster-randomized trial in western Kenya. J Water Health. 2013;11(3):507–519. doi: 10.2166/wh.2013.213.
    1. Pearson M, Chilton R, Wyatt K, Abraham C, Ford T, Woods HB, et al. Implementing health promotion programmes in schools: a realist systematic review of research and experience in the United Kingdom. Implement Sci. 2015;10:149. doi: 10.1186/s13012-015-0338-6.
    1. Joshi DBG, González-Botero D. Menstrual hygiene management: education and empowerment for girls? Waterlines. 2015;34:51–67. doi: 10.3362/1756-3488.2015.006.
    1. Trinies V, Caruso B, Sogore A, Toubkiss J, Freeman M. Uncovering the challenges to menstrual hygiene management in schools in Mali. Waterlines. 2015;34(1):31–40. doi: 10.3362/1756-3488.2015.004.
    1. Sommer M, Vasquez, E., Worthington, N., & Sahin, M. WASH in schools empowers girls’ education: proceedings of the menstrual hygiene management in schools virtual conference 2012. United Nations Children’s Fund and Columbia University. New York. . 2013. Accessed February 4th 2020.
    1. Chandra-Mouli V, Patel SV. Mapping the knowledge and understanding of menarche, menstrual hygiene and menstrual health among adolescent girls in low- and middle-income countries. Reprod Health. 2017;14(1):30. doi: 10.1186/s12978-017-0293-6.

Source: PubMed

3
Se inscrever