Determination of the genital hygiene behaviors of pregnant women with diabetes mellitus: a cross-sectional study

Abstract Background It is important to understand the genital hygiene behaviors of pregnant women with diabetes mellitus to prevent urogenital tract infections and to ensure healthy pregnancy and childbirth. The aim of this study was to determine genital hygiene behaviors and identify factors associated with GHBI scores among pregnant women with diabetes mellitus. Methods This descriptive and cross-sectional study was conducted with pregnant women with diabetes mellitus between June 2023 and June 2024 [ n = 139]. The data were collected via the “Genital Hygiene Behaviors Inventory [GHBI]”. Comparisons of GHBI scores across participant characteristics were analyzed using independent-samples t-tests and one-way analysis of variance. Factors independently associated with GHBI scores were examined using multivariable linear regression analysis. Ethics committee approval was obtained. Results The mean score of the GHBI was 80.50 ± 9.62. Only 5% of pregnant women with diabetes mellitus reported receiving genital hygiene education during pregnancy. In univariate analyses, GHBI scores differed significantly according to age, income status, physician-diagnosed health problems, panty liner use, cleaning direction, use of toilet paper after toileting, underwear characteristics, frequency of underwear change, laundering underwear in hot water, actions taken when experiencing genital problems, and receipt of genital hygiene education (all p <.05). In multivariable linear regression analysis, age, income status, and pre-pregnancy diabetes remained independently associated with GHBI scores (all p <.05). Conclusions Genital hygiene behaviors of pregnant women with diabetes mellitus were associated with several sociodemographic characteristics and hygiene-related practices. Integrating genital hygiene education and counseling into routine antenatal care may help support healthy hygiene behaviors in this population. The findings should be interpreted in light of the single-centre, cross-sectional design of the study.