Policies, Guidelines, and Practices Supporting Women’s Menstruation, Menstrual Disorders and Menopause at Work: A Critical Global Scoping Review

• Published in: Healthcare (Basel) Vol. 11; no. 22; p. 2945
• Main Authors: Howe, Danielle, Duffy, Sarah, O’Shea, Michelle, Hawkey, Alex, Wardle, Jon, Gerontakos, Sophia, Steele, Linda, Gilbert, Emilee, Owen, Lara, Ciccia, Donna, Cox, Emma, Redmond, Rebecca, Armour, Mike
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Basel MDPI AG 01.11.2023
• Subjects: Care and treatment; Diagnosis; employer guidelines; Endometriosis; Evaluation; Gender; Gynecology; Health aspects; Human resources; Humanities; Intervention; Legislation; Menopause; menstrual disorders; Menstruation; Menstruation disorders; Occupational health; organisational policy; Practice guidelines (Medicine); Productivity; Reproductive health; Symptom management; Transgender persons; Womens health; Working women; workplace; Australia; United Kingdom > UK
• ISSN: 2227-9032; 2227-9032
• DOI: 10.3390/healthcare11222945

(1) Objectives: This paper presents a scoping review of global evidence relating to interventions (i.e., policies, practices, guidelines, and legislation) aimed at supporting women to manage menstruation, menstrual disorders, and menopause at work. (2) Methods: Databases including Medline (Ebsco), CINAHL (Ebsco), Scopus, Web of Science, APA PsychInfo (Ebsco), Humanities International Complete (Ebsco), Academic Search Premier (Ebsco), HeinOnline and OSH Update, and Google Scholar were searched in May 2022. (3) Results: Of 1181 unique articles screened, 66 articles are included. Less half of the articles (42%, 28/66) presented/reviewed an intervention related to women’s workplace health. A total of 55 out of the 66 articles are set across 13 countries with the remaining 12 articles described as multi-country studies or reviews. Half of the articles presenting/reviewing an intervention were grey literature, with several undertaken in UK and EU member countries. Interventions focusing on supporting women with menopause at work were the most common (43%, 12/28), followed by menstruation (25%, 7/28) and menstrual disorders (7%, 2/28). Across the reviewed articles, recommendations were categorised as adjustments to the physical work environment, information and training needs, and policy and processes. Few articles explicitly presented or affirmed a design-process and/or evaluation tied to their intervention. In lieu of design-process, this review categorises the rationales driving the development of an intervention as: pronatalist, economic rationalism, gendered occupational health concern, cultural shift towards gender equity objectives, and efforts to reduced shame and stigma. (4) Conclusions: There is a growing body of evidence aimed at understanding women’s experiences of managing their menstrual and reproductive health in the workplace and how this impacts their work/career trajectories. However, little research is explicitly concerned with exploring or understanding interventions, including their design or evaluation. Most articles report menopause guidelines and are typically confined to the UK and EU-member countries. Despite the prevalence of menstrual disorders (e.g., endometriosis and polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS)) there is limited literature focused on how women might be supported to manage symptoms associated with these conditions at work. Accordingly, future policies should consider how women can be better supported to manage menstruation and menstrual disorders at work and recognise the importance of co-design during policy development and post-intervention evaluation. Further research needs to be undertaken on the impact of workplace policies on both employers and employees.