We have reviewed the article by DeLoughery et al,
The study reviewed a range of menstrual products and worked to quantify their absorbency.
The study’s experimental design accounted for the functional differences inherent in different menstrual products. Testing protocols were tailored for each product variant, thereby facilitating the precise quantification of absorption capacity. Moreover, the investigation featured a comparison of high versus low absorbency product categories, for both tampons and pads.
Furthermore, the study’s primary objective was to highlight the implications of differential absorbency between volumes reported by manufacturers compared with what was tested and its impact on prevailing diagnostic criteria for heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB). Given its reliance on self-reported product utilisation, this criterion could be compromised by these volume discrepancies.
However, there were limitations to this study. The anecdotal claim of the prevalence of discs…