Premenstrual Disorders, Their Severity Patterns, and Predictors Among Female University Students in Western Uganda: A Cross‐Sectional Study

Le résumé fourni par la source

ABSTRACT Background Premenstrual disorders (PMDs), including premenstrual syndrome (PMS) and premenstrual dysphoric disorder (PMDD), are common menstrual‐related conditions that significantly impact the quality of life and academic performance of young women. This study aimed to determine their burden and predictors among female university students in Western Uganda. Methodology We conducted a cross‐sectional study (December 2024–March 2025) at Kampala International University, Western Campus using the Premenstrual Symptoms Screening Tool (PSST). The PSST comprises symptom items and functional‐impairment items with validated diagnostic cut‐offs for PMDD and for moderate‐to‐severe PMS. We performed bivariate and multivariable logistic regression to identify predictors of PMDs, reporting adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results A total of 453 participants were enrolled. Overall, 75.9% met PSST diagnostic criteria for a PMD. PMS accounted for 46.3% and PMDD for 29.6% of the sample. Among PMS cases, moderate severity predominated (52.8%), followed by mild (36.2%) and severe (11.0%) categories. Independent predictors of PMDs included enrollment in the School of Allied Health Sciences (aOR = 4.25, 95% CI 1.00–18.03, p = 0.050), Muslim religion (aOR = 2.79, 95% CI 1.19–6.54, p = 0.020), drug use (aOR = 2.44, 95% CI 1.13–5.26, p = 0.024), and history of traumatic events (aOR = 2.24, 95% CI 1.07–4.70, p = 0.031). Conclusions This study demonstrates a substantial burden of PMDs among female university students, with a predominance of moderate symptom severity. These findings support the need for screening and intervention programs within university settings. Targeted psychosocial support, stress‐management strategies, and menstrual health services may mitigate the academic and emotional consequences of PMDs.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.