| Literature DB >> 24563779 |
Halima Boubacar Maïnassara1, Zilahatou Tohon2.
Abstract
Objective. To assess the effect on health of the following measures in schools in Maradi (Niger): clean water supply, construction of latrines, establishment of hand washing stations, and health education. Methodology. It was a "before and after" intervention study on a sample of school children aged 7 to 12 years in the Maradi region. The interventions included building of latrines, supplying clean water, setting up hand washing stations, and teaching health education lessons. An individual questionnaire, analysis of stool samples, and a group questionnaire were administered to children and teachers, respectively. The threshold for significance was set at P < 0.05. Results. A statistically significant reduction in cases of diarrhoea and abdominal pains was noted after the project. Overall, carriage of at least one parasite increased from 7.5% before the project to 10.2% after it (P = 0.04). In the programme group schools, there was a statistically significant increase in the prevalence of Hymenolepis nana, from 0 to 1.9 (P = 0.02). Pinworm prevalence remained stable in this group but increased significantly in the control group. Conclusions. Putting health infrastructure in place in schools obviously had an impact on hygiene-related habits in the beneficiary schools and communities.Entities:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24563779 PMCID: PMC3915855 DOI: 10.1155/2014/190451
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Parasitol Res ISSN: 2090-0023
Timetable of activities: ESAMIS project and CERMES surveys.
|
|
Sex, frequency of functional signs due to lack of hygiene, absence from school, pupils' hand washing, and latrine use before and after the project, Maradi, Niger.
| Before the project | After the project | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| % per group |
| % per group | ||
| Pupils selected | |||||
| Programme group | 343 | 51.6 | 359 | 51.6 | |
| Control group | 322 | 48.4 | 337 | 48.4 | |
| Total |
|
| |||
|
| |||||
| Before the project | After the project | ||||
|
| % of girls |
| % of girls | ||
|
| |||||
| Breakdown by sex | |||||
| Programme group | 343 | 42.3 | 359 | 41.8 | |
| Control group | 322 | 28.6 | 337 | 31.8 | |
| Total |
|
|
|
| |
|
| |||||
| Before the project | After the project | ||||
|
| Prevalence (%) |
| Prevalence (%) | ||
|
| |||||
| Diarrhoea | |||||
| Programme group | 343 | 3.2 | 356 | 3.1 | |
| Control group | 322 | 3.2 | 335 | 2.4 | |
| Total |
|
|
|
|
|
| Abdominal pains | |||||
| Programme group | 343 | 5.2 | 356 | 3.1 | |
| Control group | 322 | 4.0 | 334 | 3.3 | |
| Total |
|
|
|
|
|
| Vomiting | |||||
| Programme group | 343 | 2.0 | 356 | 1.1 | |
| Control group | 322 | 1.2 | 334 | 1.5 | |
| Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||
| Before the project | After the project | ||||
|
| Frequency (%) |
| Frequency (%) | ||
|
| |||||
| Absence from school | |||||
| Programme group | 343 | 4.4 | 359 | 8.6 | |
| Control group | 322 | 0.6 | 337 | 5.9 | |
| Total |
|
|
|
|
|
| Latrine use at home | |||||
| Programme group | 330 | 24.8 | 359 | 29.9 | |
| Control group | 322 | 6.8 | 334 | 3.3 | |
| Total |
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage of use of drinking water sources at school before and after the project.
| Before the project | After the project | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total | Water tap | Borehole | Well | Total | Water tap | Borehole | Wells | |
| Programme group | 92 | 87.0 | 2.2 | 10.9 | 270 | 99.6 | 0.4 | 0.0 |
| Control group | 39 | 0.0 | 10.3 | 89.7 | 95 | 1.1 | 42.1 | 56.8 |
| Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comparison of intestinal parasite carriage rates (%) before and after the project.
| Before the project | After the project |
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total | Prevalence (%) | Total | Prevalence (%) | |||
| Programme group | 343 | 9.6 | 359 | 8.1 | 0.34 | 0.55 |
| Control group | 321 | 5.3 | 337 | 12.5 | 9.6 | 0.001 |
| Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prevalence of parasites found before and after the project in programme schools and control schools.
| Parasite | Before the project | After the project |
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number positive | Prevalence (%) | Number positive | Prevalence (%) | |||
|
| ||||||
| Programme group | 1 | 0.3 | 0 | 0 |
5 | 0.98 |
| Control group | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
|
| ||||||
|
| ||||||
| Programme group | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| Control group | 1 | 0.3 | 0 | 0 | ||
|
| ||||||
|
| ||||||
| Programme group | 3 | 0.9 | 8 | 2.2 | 1.3 | 0.25 |
| Control group | 2 | 0.6 | 11 | 3.3 | 4.63 | 0.03 |
|
| ||||||
|
| ||||||
| Programme group | 1 | 0.3 | 0 | 0 |
5 | 0.98 |
| Control group | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
|
| ||||||
|
| ||||||
| Programme group | 3 | 0.9 | 0 | 0 | 1.43 | 0.23 |
| Control group | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
|
| ||||||
|
| ||||||
| Programme group | 0 | 0 | 7 | 1.9 | 0.92 | 0.02 |
| Control group | 5 | 1.5 | 11 | 3.3 | 1.36 | 0.24 |