Patterns in Urogenital Health in Active Duty Servicewomen: A Prospective Cross-Sectional Survey Evaluating Impacts of Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene Resources Across Three Military Environments.

INTRODUCTION

Female warfighters are at risk for sex-specific and frequently unrecognized urogenital health challenges that may impede their ability to serve. The constraints on water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) resources by austere environments, whether at home or abroad, require women to practice unhealthy hygiene behaviors that jeopardize their urogenital health. In this manuscript, we examine the use of WASH resources by U.S. Army active duty servicewomen (ADSW) across three settings-home duty, field training, and deployment-to determine how the changing availability of WASH resources alters hygiene and sanitation practices in austere environments. Additionally, we report findings from a previously developed theoretical framework for determining the impacts of austere environments on ADSW's hygiene knowledge, behaviors, and outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study used a prospective, cross-sectional survey design with population sampling and generalized ordered logit regression models. We recruited ADSW assigned to a large military installation in the southeastern United States after conducting a structured field hygiene training for female readiness.

RESULTS

We surveyed a highly diverse sample of 751 ADSW and found that the use of WASH resources significantly differs between field training and deployment. Clean running water significantly differed among all settings, with nearly 70% reporting clean running water to be rarely or never available during field training. Bathing facility types significantly differed in each setting, with Cadillac bathrooms more often used during deployment than during field training and wipe baths more often used during field training than during deployment. We found that women were significantly less likely to wash their private areas more than 2 days a week during field training, compared to deployment. Women reported changing their underwear ≤2 times per week in field training environments as compared to during deployment. Soap and water were reported as the most common ways of washing in both home duty stations and during deployment, followed by wipes at home duty stations and in deployed settings. Participants reported wipes as their primary bathing method during field training, followed by soap and water. Participants used intentional dehydration or delayed urination more frequently in field training than during deployment. Women reported significant differences in holding their urine between field training and deployment, with principal reasons reported as "dirty facilities" and "distance to the nearest restroom." Significantly, they reported safety concerns when bathing, using the bathroom, or toileting facilities across the three settings.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to characterize sex-specific challenges by a large sample of operational ADSW and to explore the use of WASH resources in home duty, field training, and deployment settings. The results show that field training is more austere than deployed settings, indicating that austerity, not deployment, increases the urogenital infection risk for ADSW. With women more integrated into the military strategy than at any time in U.S. history, military leaders can use our results to develop interventions that ameliorate the unique challenges that influence the military readiness and overall health of female warfighters.