Clinical perspectives on the menstrual pictogram for the assessment of heavy menstrual bleeding

Abstract

Abstract Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) has an estimated prevalence of 18–32% but is known to be under-reported due to poor recognition and estimation of menstrual blood loss (MBL). HMB can negatively impact quality of life, affecting social interactions, work productivity and sexual life. Abnormal menstrual bleeding may have an underlying structural or systemic cause, such as endometrial and myometrial disorders; however, for some, there is no identified pathological cause. Several methods are available for assessing MBL, including the alkaline hematin (AH) method and the menstrual pictogram (MP). The AH method is considered to be the most accurate way to monitor MBL; however, it is associated with inconvenience and expense, therefore limiting its value outside of research. The MP requires the user to select an icon from a chart that reflects the appearance of a used sanitary product; the icon is associated with a blood volume that can be used to determine MBL. Validation studies have demonstrated that the results of the MP and AH method are well correlated, showing that the MP can measure MBL with sufficient accuracy. Additionally, the MP is more convenient for users, less expensive than the AH method, may be used in regions where the AH method is unavailable and may also be used as part of a digital application. Overall, the MP offers a convenient approach to monitor MBL both in research and clinical practice settings.