Literature DB >> 17550475

Characteristics of latrine promotion participants and non-participants; inspection of latrines; and perceptions of household latrines in Northern Ghana.

Ann F Rodgers1, Lydia A Ajono, John O Gyapong, Maria Hagan, Paul M Emerson.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To examine characteristics of household heads in two districts of Northern Ghana who had or had not participated in latrine promotion programmes; to inspect latrines; and to explore perceptions of latrine ownership.
METHODS: One hundred and twenty latrine owners and 120 non-owners were randomly selected from all trachoma-endemic villages and interviewed. Structured questionnaires assessed demographics, household data, wealth indicators, and perceptions of latrine ownership. Latrines were inspected.
RESULTS: Latrine owners and non-owners were similar demographically, but owners were more likely to report any education or wealth indicators: any education OR = 2.0, (95% CI 1.2-3.4); large family size OR = 4.6 (2.6-8.2); children in school OR = 3.8 (1.3-10.5); and metal roof OR = 9.1 (2.0-40.0). All 120 latrine owners were participating in promotion programmes; no latrines had been self-built without programme support. Inspection showed 73/120 (60.1%) latrines were completed and used. Of the uncompleted latrines 41/47 (87.2%) were more than a year old. Programme participants (regardless of whether they had a completed latrine) had contributed cash (mean 16.74 dollars S.D.18.09) and 117/120 had provided labour and/or construction materials. The most frequently reported advantages of latrine ownership were convenience, cleanliness and health benefits; reported disadvantages were the need for maintenance and cleaning and bad odour.
CONCLUSIONS: Current latrine promotion programmes do not reach all households equally. Joining a latrine programme was expensive and did not guarantee latrine ownership; this may cause people to lose trust in such programmes. Latrines were perceived to be useful, suggesting unmet demand. Reliable and inclusive programmes that provide low cost latrines may receive community support.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17550475     DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-3156.2007.01848.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Trop Med Int Health        ISSN: 1360-2276            Impact factor:   2.622


  11 in total

1.  Is Using a Latrine "A Strange Thing To Do"? A Mixed-Methods Study of Sanitation Preference and Behaviors in Rural Ethiopia.

Authors:  Kristen Aiemjoy; Nicole E Stoller; Sintayehu Gebresillasie; Ayalew Shiferaw; Zerihun Tadesse; Tegene Sewent; Bezuayehu Ayele; Melsew Chanyalew; Solomon Aragie; Kelly Callahan; Aisha Stewart; Paul M Emerson; Thomas M Lietman; Jeremy D Keenan; Catherine E Oldenburg
Journal:  Am J Trop Med Hyg       Date:  2016-11-14       Impact factor: 2.345

2.  Country clustering applied to the water and sanitation sector: a new tool with potential applications in research and policy.

Authors:  Kyle Onda; Jonny Crocker; Georgia Lyn Kayser; Jamie Bartram
Journal:  Int J Hyg Environ Health       Date:  2013-08-28       Impact factor: 5.840

3.  Geographical analysis of the role of water supply and sanitation in the risk of helminth infections of children in West Africa.

Authors:  Ricardo J Soares Magalhães; Adrian G Barnett; Archie C A Clements
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-11-28       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Sanitation investments in Ghana: An ethnographic investigation of the role of tenure security, land ownership and livelihoods.

Authors:  Y Awunyo-Akaba; J Awunyo-Akaba; M Gyapong; K Senah; F Konradsen; T Rheinländer
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2016-07-18       Impact factor: 3.295

5.  The Role of Perceived Social Norms in Rural Sanitation: An Explorative Study from Infrastructure-Restricted Settings of South Ethiopia.

Authors:  Josef Novotný; Jana Kolomazníková; Helena Humňalová
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2017-07-17       Impact factor: 3.390

6.  A cross sectional study: latrine coverage and associated factors among rural communities in the District of Bahir Dar Zuria, Ethiopia.

Authors:  Worku Awoke; Semahegn Muche
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2013-02-04       Impact factor: 3.295

7.  User perceptions of shared sanitation among rural households in Indonesia and Bangladesh.

Authors:  Kali B Nelson; Jonathan Karver; Craig Kullman; Jay P Graham
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-08-04       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Sanitation and Hygiene-Specific Risk Factors for Moderate-to-Severe Diarrhea in Young Children in the Global Enteric Multicenter Study, 2007-2011: Case-Control Study.

Authors:  Kelly K Baker; Ciara E O'Reilly; Myron M Levine; Karen L Kotloff; James P Nataro; Tracy L Ayers; Tamer H Farag; Dilruba Nasrin; William C Blackwelder; Yukun Wu; Pedro L Alonso; Robert F Breiman; Richard Omore; Abu S G Faruque; Sumon Kumar Das; Shahnawaz Ahmed; Debasish Saha; Samba O Sow; Dipika Sur; Anita K M Zaidi; Fahreen Quadri; Eric D Mintz
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2016-05-03       Impact factor: 11.069

9.  A socio-ecological analysis of barriers to the adoption, sustainablity and consistent use of sanitation facilities in rural Ethiopia.

Authors:  Fikralem Alemu; Abera Kumie; Girmay Medhin; Teshome Gebre; Phoebe Godfrey
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2017-09-13       Impact factor: 3.295

10.  Importance of triggers and veto-barriers for the implementation of sanitation in informal peri-urban settlements - The case of Cochabamba, Bolivia.

Authors:  Ida Helgegren; Sebastien Rauch; Claudia Cossio; Graciela Landaeta; Jennifer McConville
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-04-04       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.