Clinical bleeding patterns and management techniques of abnormal uterine bleeding at a teaching and referral hospital in Western Kenya.

Abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) affects 30% of reproductive age women globally. However, there are limited local studies evaluating the management of these women. The diagnostic guideline using structural and functional causes of AUB adopts the PALM-COEIN criteria, namely: Polyp; Adenomyosis; Leiomyoma; Malignancy and Hyperplasia; Coagulopathy; Ovulatory dysfunction; Endometrial; Iatrogenic; and Not yet classified. This study aimed to determine the clinical bleeding patterns, adherence to PALM-COEIN diagnosis guidelines and management of AUB among women in their reproductive age. This was a cross-sectional study among 108 women with AUB aged 18-45 years was conducted at the gynaecology department of Moi Teaching and Referral Hospital in Western Kenya between April 2018 and April 2019. Their sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were collected using interviewer administered structured questionnaire and chart reviews. Adherence to diagnosis recommendations was assessed using PALM COEIN classification. Descriptive and inferential data analysis was conducted at 95% confidence interval. The median age was 30 (IQR: 22, 41) years with prolonged bleeding as the most predominant pattern at 41.7%. Bleeding patterns were significantly associated with age (p = 0.04). Only 16.7% were diagnosed as per the PALM-COEIN criteria with PALM and COEIN accounting for 60% and 40% respectively. Leiomyoma (44.5%) was the common cause of AUB. Laboratory evaluation included: pregnancy tests, full haemogram, hormonal profile and biopsy. Most (79.6%) of the women had abdominopelvic ultrasound done. Medical management was provided for 78.7% of women. Prolonged bleeding was the most common pattern with medical management preferred. There is need for in-hospital algorithms to ensure adherence to PALM-COEIN guidelines.

Introduction

Abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) among women has a global prevalence of between 3–30% [1] accounting for about one third of outpatient gynaecology visits. This condition affects the quality of life for women with socioeconomic and psychological consequences [1]. Its occurrence is dependent on temporal and quantitative regulation of reproductive hormones (hypothalamic-pituitary-ovarian axis). The menstrual flow mediated by prostaglandins occurs following degeneration of the corpus luteum. Currently, the use of PALM-COEIN (Polyps; Adenomyosis; Leiomyoma; Malignancy and Hyperplasia; Coagulopathy; Ovulatory dysfunction; Endometrial; Iatrogenic; and Not yet classified) classification reduces the general inconsistency in the description of AUB in clinical and research settings.

Although the PALM-COEIN classification guideline is the gold standard for AUB diagnosis; it is not commonly used in many clinical settings leading to a lack of standardization in the diagnosis of women with AUB. There is limited documented studies on the bleeding patterns and management guidelines for women with AUB in Kenya. There is need to determine the proportions of women presenting with AUB at MTRH to plan for various management options. Knowledge of clinical presentation patterns of AUB will be used in putting in place control strategies. Evaluation of management strategies and their conformity to guidelines will create new knowledge on what aspects to be modified.

Clinical bleeding patterns are determined by the heaviness, duration of flow, regularity, and frequency. The causes of AUB can either be structural (PALM) or non-structural (COEIN) [2]. Management on the other hand includes the diagnostic techniques and therapeutic interventions offered to the affected women [3]. Diagnosis could be through laboratory, radiological and other imaging techniques [4]. Clinical management for women with AUB is either medical or surgical. Medical management is the first line therapeutic option once malignancy and pelvic pathology have been ruled out [5]. On the other hand, Surgical Management includes both minimal invasive techniques such as endometrial ablation for heavy menstrual bleeding [6] and invasive techniques such as hysterectomy and myomectomy. Hysterectomy is the definitive solution with high rates of patient satisfaction [7]. This study aimed to determine the clinical bleeding patterns and management of AUB among women in their reproductive age. Specifically, it determined level of adherence to PALM-COEIN diagnostic guidelines for uterine bleeding, diagnostic tests ordered, medical and surgical management offered for women presenting with abnormal uterine bleeding.

Materials and methods

This was a cross-sectional study among women presenting with abnormal uterine bleeding at Moi Teaching and Referral Hospital in Western Kenya from April 2018 to April 2019. The facility is the second largest tertiary hospital in Kenya catering for patients in Western and North Rift Valley regions of the country. A census was conducted among all the reproductive age (18–45 years) women seeking care for abnormal uterine bleeding. This was defined as an episode of bleeding in a woman of reproductive age, who is not pregnant and is of sufficient quantity to require immediate intervention to prevent further blood loss. If the bleeding prolonged over a six-month period, it was referred to as chronic abnormal uterine bleeding. Patient’s history and clinical information from medical records were collected. These included: the diagnostic tests done, final diagnosis made, and treatment given. Data analysis was conducted using statistical package for social sciences (SPSS) version 22 software. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize categorical variables such as level of education and marital status. Continuous variables such as age, duration of bleeding among others were summarized using mean and the corresponding standard deviation if the Gaussian assumptions hold. Otherwise they were summarized using median and the corresponding inter quartile range (IQR). Gaussian assumptions were assessed using histograms and the normal probability plots. Inferential statistics techniques using Pearson chi-square test was conducted to determine the level of statistical significance between predictor and outcome variables. The study’s ethical approval was obtained from the Institutional Research and Ethics Committee of Moi University and Moi Teaching and Referral Hospital.

Results

The study enrolled a total of 108 women with AUB as per the flow chart on Fig 1. The mean age of the study participants was 31.46 years (SD ± 11.17). Most 64.8% (n = 70) of them had attained secondary level of education with 24.1% (26) having attended university/college level of education. Only 10.2% (n = 11) were formally employed while more than half (57.4%; n = 62) of all the participants living outside Eldoret.

Fig 1

Ultrasound done as per the PALM-COEIN criteria.

Abnormal uterine bleeding patterns

Prolonged bleeding was the most common (41.7%) bleeding pattern followed by heavy (35.2%), frequent (20.4%), intermenstrual (18.5%) and infrequent (8.3%) bleeding as (Table 1).

Table 1

Abnormal uterine bleeding patterns seen at MTRH.

Bleeding pattern	Frequency	Percentage
Prolonged bleeding	45	41.7
Heavy bleeding	38	35.2
Frequent bleeding	22	20.4
Intermenstrual bleeding	20	18.5
Infrequent bleeding	9	8.3

Management of women with AUB

Management of women with AUB was categorized in terms of diagnosis and cost of management.

Out of the 108 participants enrolled, only 16.7% (n = 18) were diagnosed as per the PALM-COEIN criteria. However, there was no statistically significant difference (p-value = 0.364) in abnormal uterine bleeding between the groups that were diagnosed as per the PALM-COEIN criteria versus those that were not (Table 2).

Table 2

Diagnosis as per the PALM-COEIN criteria.

Diagnosis	P	A	L	M	C	O	E	I	N	Totals
Yes	1	1	13	1	0	2	0	0	0	18 (16.7%)
No	5	8	35	12	0	10	7	12	1	90 (83.3%)
Total	6	9	48	13	0	12	7	12	1	108 (100%)

(p-value = 0.364).

All the study participants had a pregnancy test done. This was followed by a complete blood count (CBC) test among nearly half (45.3%; n = 49), coagulation profile (25.9%; n = 28) and Thyroid Stimulating Hormone (TSH) at 12% (n = 13).

Additional hormonal profile laboratory tests were conducted based on menstrual cycle pattern (regular versus irregular). Overally, follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) was the most commonly (13%) ordered among all the study participants with 13.2% of the women with regular menstrual cycles being subjected to it. This was followed by a TSH test that was commonly ordered for women with irregular (15%) compared to those with regular (10.3%) cycles. Prolactin hormone test was the least frequently ordered. Estradiol and progesterone hormone tests were not ordered at all. There were no statistically significant relationships reported between menstrual cycle patterns (Table 3). Biopsy sampling was categorized by the participants age and whether it was done. Among women aged 35 years or less (n = 72), none of them had a biopsy specimen collected. On the other hand, those aged more than 35 years, only 8.3% (n = 3) had biopsy sampling done.

Table 3

Laboratory testing of hormonal profiles as per the menstrual cycles.

Cycle	TSH	Estradiol	Prolactin	Progesterone	FSH	LH
Regular (n = 68)	7 (10.3%)	0	1 (1.5%)	0	9 (13.2%)	0
Irregular (n = 40)	6 (15%)	0	2 (5%)	0	5 (12.5%)	0
Total (N = 108)	13 (12%)	0	3 (2.8%)	0	14 (13%)	0
p-value	0.468	-	0.281	-	0.913	-

As per the PALM-COEIN classification, all women presenting with polyps, endometrial causes and non-classified abnormal uterine bleeding had a pelvic ultrasound done. Leiomyoma was the most commonly presenting cause of endometrial bleeding, of which more than two thirds (68.8%; n = 33) of the women presenting with it had a pelvic ultrasound ordered. Higher proportions of pelvic ultrasound requests were reported among those with adenomyosis (77.8%; n = 7), malignancy/hyperplasia (84.6%; n = 11), ovulation dysfunction (83.3%; n = 10) and iatrogenic (91.7%; n = 11) causes of abnormal uterine bleeding (Fig 1). Even though 8.3% (n = 9) of the participants presented with adenomyosis; none of them got an MRI scan done.

Majority of the women presenting with AUB were treated medically. Analgesics were given to nearly all (92.6%; n = 100) the study participants while more than three quarters (78.7%; n = 85) received antibiotics. Tranexamic acid (TXM) was prescribed to more than half (61.1%; n = 66) of the study participants, followed by haematinics (39.8%; n = 43) while blood transfusion and combined oral contraceptives (COCs) were given to 6.5% (n = 7) and 5.5% (n = 6) respectively. No participant was given levonorgestrel intrauterine system (LGIUS), Progesterone only Pills (POP), androgens and gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists as (Fig 2).

Fig 2

Medical management chart for women with AUB.

Surgical management was offered to 21.3% (n = 23) of all the study participants, majority (69.6%; n = 16) of whom got myomectomy done. This was followed by abdominal hysterectomy at 17.5% (n = 4). The less frequent procedures were dilatation and curettage (D&C), polypectomy and oophorectomy at 4.3% (n = 1) each. No participant got uterine artery embolization (UAE), endometrial Ablation and vaginal or laparoscopic hysterectomy (Fig 3).

Fig 3

Surgical management of women with AUB.

Discussion

The study was undertaken among women of reproductive age to determine the causes of abnormal uterine bleeding based on PALM-COEIN classification and the management options adopted. Nearly two-thirds of the study participants had a minimum of secondary education; however only one-tenth of those enrolled were engaged in formal employment. This could be attributed to the low unemployment rates in Kenya especially among women of reproductive age who mainly engage in informal businesses or take care of their families as housewives. This was confirmed by a national survey of Kenyan youth (aged 18–35 years) where 62% of women were unemployed compared to an average unemployment rate of 15% among youths with a minimum of secondary education [8].

This study reported that prolonged bleeding was the most common bleeding pattern seen among nearly half (41.7%; n = 45) of all the women enrolled into the study. This finding was higher than an Indian study [9] with one-third (33.6%) of all the study participants presenting with prolonged bleeding. The Indian study adopted a retrospective study design over a six-month period among 250 patients aged between 25 to 65 years. This variance in study design, period and target population could explain the variance in proportions of study participants. Prolonged bleeding was defined as more than eight (8) days of bleeding. It could have been easier to count more than 8 days than quantify other forms of AUB such as heavy bleeding.

Heavy Bleeding was the second most common AUB pattern among more than one-third (35.2%; n = 38) of all enrolled study participants. This finding is matched a Brazilian study that reported a proportion of women with heavy bleeding at 35.3% [10]. Both studies adopted cross-sectional study designs among women aged 18–45 years and this could explain the similarity in proportions.

Frequent bleeding was the third most frequent AUB pattern among nearly one-fifth (18%; n = 22) of all the study participants. This proportion is similar to the findings in another Indian study where 17% of all the women enrolled complained of frequent bleeding [11]. This similarity could be attributed to the fact that both studies targeted women in their reproductive years and were both conducted in teaching hospitals.

Less than one-fifth (16.7%; n = 18) of all the study participants were diagnosed as per the PALM-COEIN criteria. Preoperative classification of AUB as per PALM-COEIN classification system was correctly done among 130 (65.0%) of the 200 women in a study in a low resource setting [12]. However, the overall proportion of participants who met the PALM and COEIN criteria accounted for 60% (n = 64) and 40% (n = 44) respectively. This matched an Indian study [13] where 60.4% and 39.6% were diagnosed as per the PALM and COEIN criteria respectively. This similarity could be attributed to the fact that both studies were done in a tertiary teaching hospital among non-pregnant women over a period of one year. In a retrospective analysis of women who underwent a planned abdominal hysterectomy for AUB, leiomyoma was most common cause at 44.2% [14]. This finding is comparable to the current study’s finding of nearly half (44.4%) of all study participants presenting with leiomyoma as the most common cause of abnormal uterine bleeding.

Malignancy and hyperplasia were the second most common abnormalities with a proportion of 12% (n = 13). There were equal proportions iatrogenic and ovulation dysfunction among the women sampled at 11.1% (n = 12). This matched an Indian study [11] where 13.6% of the study participants presented with malignancy and hyperplasia.

The most frequent laboratory tests conducted among the enrolled women with abnormal uterine bleeding were pregnancy tests (100%), complete blood counts (45.3%) and coagulation profile (25.9%), follicle stimulating hormone (13%) and thyroid stimulating hormone (12%). There were low proportions of and prolactin hormone (2.8%) tests. However, no participant got laboratory requests for oestradiol, progesterone and luteinising hormone. Pregnancy test is mandatory in the evaluation of women with AUB to rule out pregnancy related bleeding; while complete blood count was assayed to evaluate any associated infections, anaemia and low platelet count. Hormonal profiles were ordered to rule out abnormal uterine bleeding related to imbalance and to inform treatment options. Only 3 (2.7%) participants had a biopsy sample taken. This was done only among women aged below 35 years.

Abdominopelvic ultrasound was done for the majority (79.6%; n = 86) of the study participants to rule out structural causes of uterine bleeding. Those (20%) who did not have the ultrasound scans done were due to lack of funds or clinicians not requesting. This finding compares to a Pakistani study [15] in which all the study participants had an abdominopelvic ultrasound done. However, the findings contrast those in the Netherlands where only 10% of the women presenting with AUB had an abdominopelvic ultrasound conducted [16].

Medical and Surgical management was offered to 78.7% (n = 85) and 21.3% (n = 23) respectively. Analgesics were prescribed to nearly all (92.6%) of the study participants followed by antibiotics (78.7%) and antifibrinolytics (61.1%). Abdominal pain coupled with per vaginal bleeding are the common clinical presentation of abnormal uterine bleeding. Because majority of the women presented with intense abdominal pain, they were prescribed for analgesics at the initial stage of treatment alongside antibiotics because of pyrexia and other infection symptoms. This finding contrasted a Dutch study [16] where nearly two thirds (62%) of the study participants did not receive any medication, while analgesics were prescribed among 5% of the study participants who presented with excessive bleeding. This could be attributed to the fact that majority of the women were initially seen by General Practitioners and only a few referred to gynecologists. A systematic review [17] by the Vanderbilt Evidenced based practice center of six studies on non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDS) among women with AUB; reported that NSAIDS reduced bleeding in the participants enrolled in all the six studies. The study further reported that tranexamic acid (TXA) was more effective in reducing bleeding than NSAIDS in three out of four studies reviewed.

Hematinics used at 43(39.8%) while blood transfusion done in 7(6.5%) although more than 56% needed them. Combined oral contraceptives were prescribed among 5.5% of the study participants enrolled in this study; because of their hormonal nature, they are effective in controlling abnormal uterine bleeding by regulating the menstrual cycle and reducing the flow volume. This was lower than the 35% of women who received hormonal treatment in the Netherlands [16]. A treatment algorithm for AUB [18] recommended that abnormal bleeding persists after three months, a higher dose of oral contraceptives can be used.

Myomectomy was done in more than two-thirds of those who received surgical management due to the fact that fibroids was the most common structural cause of bleeding; its fertility sparing benefit and popularity among the study participants who were women of reproductive age. This finding corroborates with that reported in a systematic review [19] which reported that among women with myomas at risk of abnormal uterine bleeding; myomectomy is a gold-standard treatment option for those women who wish to preserve their fertility. This is coupled by its safety, minimal invasiveness and greater patient satisfaction [19,20] as corroborated in the current study’s findings.

Conclusions and recommendations

We report that prolonged bleeding was the most common bleeding pattern followed by heavy bleeding among women of reproductive age seeking care at a teaching hospital in Western Kenya. There were low proportions (16.7%) of adherence to PALM-COEIN classification as a diagnostic guideline for women with abnormal uterine bleeding. These findings create a need for clinical evaluation of abnormal uterine bleeding among women who present with prolonged bleeding. More training and development of in-hospital clinical care algorithms should be done to ensure adherence to PALM-COEIN guidelines in the diagnosis of abnormal uterine bleeding. Medical management should be opted for as the first line of management for women presenting with abnormal uterine bleeding.

Abnormal uterine bleeding affects women of reproductive age.

The recommended diagnostic guideline is using the PALM-COEIN classification.

There is limited documented studies on the bleeding patterns and management guidelines for women with AUB in Kenya.

Management of AUB has been reported to be costly by studies done in other settings, further complicating patient management and outcomes.

Prolonged and heavy bleeding are the most common abnormal uterine bleeding patterns in Western Kenya.

This study shows that the PALM-COEIN diagnostic criteria is not commonly used in Western Kenya.

The study further compares PALM-COEIN diagnostic criteria with the management offered for women with AUB in Western Kenya.

(XLSX)

Click here for additional data file.

Questionnaire.

(DOCX)

Click here for additional data file.

27 Aug 2020

PONE-D-20-16619

CLINICAL BLEEDING PATTERNS AND MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES OF ABNORMAL UTERINE BLEEDING IN WESTERN KENYA.

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Mutakha,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Oct 11 2020 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Onikepe Oluwadamilola Owolabi

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Please include additional information regarding the survey or questionnaire used in the study and ensure that you have provided sufficient details that others could replicate the analyses.

For instance, if you developed a questionnaire as part of this study and it is not under a copyright more restrictive than CC-BY, please include a copy, in both the original language and English, as Supporting Information.

If the original language is written in non-Latin characters, for example Amharic, Chinese, or Korean, please use a file format that ensures these characters are visible.

3. In your Data Availability statement, you have not specified where the minimal data set underlying the results described in your manuscript can be found. PLOS defines a study's minimal data set as the underlying data used to reach the conclusions drawn in the manuscript and any additional data required to replicate the reported study findings in their entirety. All PLOS journals require that the minimal data set be made fully available. For more information about our data policy, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability.

Upon re-submitting your revised manuscript, please upload your study’s minimal underlying data set as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and include the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers within your revised cover letter. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories. Any potentially identifying patient information must be fully anonymized.

Important: If there are ethical or legal restrictions to sharing your data publicly, please explain these restrictions in detail. Please see our guidelines for more information on what we consider unacceptable restrictions to publicly sharing data: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions. Note that it is not acceptable for the authors to be the sole named individuals responsible for ensuring data access.

We will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide in your cover letter.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: N/A

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Discussing AUB in Kenya is a matter of interest, however, conclusions based on 108 reported cases give a weak and no representative information for that.

In INTRODUTION, authors should sate the interest of the present study, but that information is not clear. For example: the difference between patterns of bleeding and causes of AUB seems confusing.

OBJECTIVES are not well defined. It’s not clear what the authors really intent to investigate

In MATERIALS and METHODS is missing important information, like the adopted definitions of AUB patterns and software used for statistical analysis of the data.

In RESULTS, characteristics of the studied population raise some doubts (64,8% had secondary level of education, but only 10,2% have an employment – this should be discussed). In AUB medical management is stated that 78,7% of the patients received antibiotics: this should be discussed.

In DISCUSSION, results are compared with those reported with other studies, but there is no explanation about the results obtained by the authors (why analgesics were given to nearly all patients? why myomectomy was performed in 69,9% of the patients? and so on…)

In CONCLUSIONS, the only one conclusion of this manuscript is that PALM-COEIN Guidelines are rarely used in Western Kenya, as in many parts of the world.

Thinking about knowledge and clinical practice applicability this study doesn’t bring anything new, however the data obtained by the authors is interesting and liable for constructing an informative and didactic paper.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

29 Sep 2020

Comment 1: Discussing AUB in Kenya is a matter of interest, however, conclusions based on 108 reported cases give a weak and no representative information for that.

This study was conducted in a teaching and referral hospital in Western Kenya. The tertiary healthcare facility offers clinical management for abnormal uterine bleeding alongside other gynaecological interventions to women from the greater Western Kenya. This makes the sample representative of the population, however not the whole country. To clarify this further, we have modified the study title to read “Clinical bleeding patterns and management techniques of abnormal uterine bleeding at a teaching and referral hospital in Western Kenya.”

Comment 2: In INTRODUTION, authors should state the interest of the present study, but that information is not clear. For example: the difference between patterns of bleeding and causes of AUB seems confusing.

This has been modified appropriately. The interest of the study has been highlighted in the second paragraph of the introduction.

The difference between patterns and causes of bleeding have been differentiated as:

“Clinical bleeding patterns are determined by the heaviness, duration of flow, regularity, and frequency.

The causes of AUB can either be structural (PALM) or non-structural (COEIN). Management on the other hand includes the diagnostic techniques and therapeutic interventions offered to the affected women.”

Comment 3: OBJECTIVES are not well defined. It is not clear what the authors really intent to investigate.

This has been modified as “This study aimed to determine the clinical bleeding patterns and management of AUB among women in their reproductive age. Specifically, it determined level of adherence to PALM-COEIN diagnostic guidelines for uterine bleeding, diagnostic tests ordered, medical and surgical management offered for women presenting with abnormal uterine bleeding.”

Comment 4: In MATERIALS and METHODS is missing important information, like the adopted definitions of AUB patterns and software used for statistical analysis of the data.

Abnormal uterine bleeding has been defined as: “an episode of bleeding in a woman of reproductive age, who is not pregnant and is of sufficient quantity to require immediate intervention to prevent further blood loss.” Bleeding Patterns were either heavy, light, frequent, infrequent, regular, irregular, prolonged or short.

Data analysis was conducted using statistical package for social sciences (SPSS) version 22 software.

Comment 5: In RESULTS, characteristics of the studied population raise some doubts (64.8% had secondary level of education, but only 10.2% have an employment – this should be discussed). In AUB medical management is stated that 78.7% of the patients received antibiotics: this should be discussed.

These have been discussed as follows:

“Nearly two-thirds of the study participants had a minimum of secondary education; however only one-tenth of those enrolled were engaged in formal employment. This could be attributed to the low unemployment rates in Kenya especially among women of reproductive age who mainly engage in informal businesses or take care of their families as housewives. This was confirmed by a national survey of Kenyan youth (aged 18-35 years) where 62% of women were unemployed compared to an average unemployment rate of 15% among youths with a minimum of secondary education.”

“Because majority of the women presented with intense abdominal pain, they were prescribed for analgesics at the initial stage of treatment alongside antibiotics because of pyrexia and other infection symptoms.”

Comment 6: In DISCUSSION, results are compared with those reported with other studies, but there is no explanation about the results obtained by the authors (why analgesics were given to nearly all patients? why myomectomy was performed in 69,9% of the patients? and so on…)

This has been modified appropriately as follows:

“Abdominal pain coupled with per vaginal bleeding are the common clinical presentation of abnormal uterine bleeding. Because majority of the women presented with intense abdominal pain, they were prescribed for analgesics at the initial stage of treatment alongside antibiotics because of pyrexia and other infection symptoms.”

“Myomectomy was done in more than two-thirds of those who received surgical management due to the fact that fibroids was the most common structural cause of bleeding; its fertility sparing benefit and popularity among the study participants who were women of reproductive age.”

Comment 7: In CONCLUSIONS, the only one conclusion of this manuscript is that PALM-COEIN Guidelines are rarely used in Western Kenya, as in many parts of the world.

The conclusion section has been expanded to include a second conclusion. Furthermore, the study recommendations have also expanded and modified appropriately.

Other comments:

i. The manuscript structure has been updated in line with all PLoS requirements.

ii. Dataset has been uploaded for review.

iii. The study’s questionnaire has been appended as additional information.

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Click here for additional data file.

17 Nov 2020

Clinical bleeding patterns and management techniques of abnormal uterine bleeding at a teaching and referral hospital in Western Kenya.

PONE-D-20-16619R1

Dear Dr. Mutakha,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Onikepe Oluwadamilola Owolabi

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: The study is interesting and didatic. All my questions have been well answered.

I have no other comments

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

20 Nov 2020

PONE-D-20-16619R1

Clinical bleeding patterns and management techniques of abnormal uterine bleeding at a teaching and referral hospital in Western Kenya.

Dear Dr. Mutakha:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Onikepe Oluwadamilola Owolabi

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE