4.2 Article

Prevalence of primary dysmenorrhea and its relationship with body mass index

期刊

JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY RESEARCH
卷 44, 期 9, 页码 1773-1778

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jog.13697

关键词

body mass index; prevalence; primary dysmenorrhea

资金

  1. Deanship of Scientific Research, Immam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University of Dammam [2015105]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

AimTo identify the association between primary dysmenorrhea (PD) and body mass index (BMI). MethodsThis cross sectional study was conducted on 370 female students (aged 18-25 years) of Immam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University Dammam, from March 2016 till March 2017. Pretested dysmenorrhea questionnaire was filled by the students. Weight and heights of the subjects were measured, and BMI was calculated. Based on BMI, subjects were divided into four groups (underweight [UW], normal weight, overweight and obese [OB]). Subjects were also categorized into mild, moderate and severe dysmenorrhic groups based on numeric pain relating scale. SPSS version 20.0 was used to analyze the data. ResultsThis study showed that 85.7% of the students were suffering from PD, out of which 12.7% had mild, 65.6% had moderate and 8.4% had severe dysmenorrhea. In total, 54.5% of the students mentioned that dysmenorrhea interferes with their daily activities. Whereas 55.8% of the students mentioned that they got pain relief by using non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Pair wise comparison of dysmenorrhea between different BMI groups showed a statistically significant difference in the frequency of moderate and severe dysmenorrhea between UW and OB subjects (P values 0.003 and 0.06) respectively, indicating that UW females are at a higher risk of having PD. ConclusionThis study indicates a higher prevalence of moderate and severe dysmenorrhea in UW as compared to the OB subjects. We recommend further studies to explore the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms responsible for this association.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据