| Literature DB >> 25674474 |
Dieudonné Uwizeye1, Cosmas H Sokoni2, Caroline W Kabiru3.
Abstract
Dwellers of urban informal settlements in developing countries are consistently reported to be victims of high diarrhoea prevalence. Studies have frequently reported the association between high diarrhoea prevalence and other factors, such as poor living conditions, inadequate hygiene, and sanitation in these settings. However, little is known about the dynamics of diarrhoea prevalence in mountainous urban informal settlements similar to the Rwandan context. This study was conducted in the Matyazo cell of Huye town to review the prevalence and correlates of diarrhoea. A survey of 214 households and transect walks in the neighbourhoods were conducted during the rainy and dry seasons. Logistic regression was used to analyse the survey data while the thematic analysis technique was used to analyse qualitative data. Results indicated a substantial reduction of diarrhoea prevalence from the rainy to the dry season. It was also found that the prevalence was unequally distributed in the neighbourhoods according to household location. After controlling for other household characteristics and sanitation conditions of around homes, the study indicated that households established at 1800 metres or more above sea level were protected against diarrhoea during both rainy seasons (Adjusted Odds Ratio_ AOR: .42, 95% Confidence Interval_ CI: .13-.81) and dry seasons (AOR: .58, CI: .12-.90) while households found further from the road were likely to suffer from diarrhoea during rainy seasons (AOR: 3.32, CI: 1.47-7.48) as well as in dry seasons (AOR: 1.60, CI: 1.26-4.10). Poor sanitation within and around homes was also found to be associated with the increase of diarrhoea in either season. However, the evidence was not sufficient enough to confirm a significant association between diarrhoea prevalence and other household characteristics. We believe this is due to the strength of environmental factors in mountainous settings.Entities:
Keywords: Diarrhoea; Mountainous environment; Neighbourhoods; Rwanda; Sanitation status; Urban informal settlements
Year: 2014 PMID: 25674474 PMCID: PMC4320130 DOI: 10.1186/2193-1801-3-745
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Springerplus ISSN: 2193-1801
Figure 1Sample units on Matyazo cell map.
Classification of the quality of the household homes
| Home category | Main description |
|---|---|
|
| Roof of the house covered by new iron sheets; the floor cemented and walls painted; the compound fenced with bricks or cemented (with a gate made of iron material) and the compound floor paved; drainage systems built; generally, the place is regularly maintained to provide comfort to household members. |
|
| Roof of the main house covered by new iron sheets or new local roofing materials (made of clay); the floor may be cemented and the walls painted but not maintained; the compound fenced by timber and the compound floor not paved but kept in good condition through regular maintenance. |
|
| The roofing material of the main house is old (either iron sheets or local roofing materials); the floor not cemented and walls not painted; the compound fenced by planted trees or no compound at all; the compound floor neither paved nor sustained. |
Environmental and social economic characteristics of households
| Variable | Level | Frequency (n = 214) | % |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
|
| 1700 or lower | 13 | 6.1 |
| 1700-1800 | 182 | 85.0 | |
| Above 1800 | 19 | 8.9 | |
|
| Level one | 87 | 40.6 |
| Level two | 51 | 23.8 | |
| Level three | 76 | 35.5 | |
|
| |||
|
| Primary education or lower | 162 | 75.7 |
| Secondary education | 42 | 19.6 | |
| Post-secondary education | 10 | 4.7 | |
|
| Low quality | 120 | 56.1 |
| Medium quality | 19 | 8.9 | |
| High quality | 75 | 35.0 | |
|
| Traditional pit toilets | 158 | 73.8 |
| Fairly improved toilet | 43 | 20.1 | |
| Modern toilet | 13 | 6.1 | |
|
| No piped water at home | 160 | 74.8 |
| Piped water at home | 54 | 25.2 | |
Observed status of the physical environment within and around homes by season
| Variable | Level | Rainy season | Dry season | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Frequency | % | Frequency | % | ||
|
| No | 178 | 83.2 | 184 | 86.0 |
| Yes | 36 | 16.8 | 30 | 14.0 | |
|
| No | 145 | 67.8 | 151 | 70.6 |
| Yes | 69 | 32.2 | 63 | 29.4 | |
|
| No | 102 | 47.7 | 94 | 43.9 |
| Yes | 112 | 52.3 | 120 | 56.1 | |
Estimated diarrhoea risk by season in Matyazo (n = 214)
| Outcome | Estimated risk (ER) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| ||
|
| 118 | 96 | 0.55 |
|
| 52 | 162 | 0.24 |
Bivariate and multivariable analysis of factors associated with diarrhoea prevalence by season
| Factors | Rainy season | Dry season | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unadjusted OR | 95% CI | Adjusted OR | 95% CI | Unadjusted OR | 95% CI | Adjusted OR | 95% CI | |
|
| ||||||||
|
| ||||||||
| 1700 & below | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||||
| 1700-1800 | .37 | .10-1.37 | .80 | .19-3.37 | .49 | .15-1.59 | .62 | .16-2.36 |
| 1800 & above | .22 | .04-.96 | .42 | .13-.81 | .43 | .09-.95 | .58 | .12- .90 |
|
| ||||||||
| Level one (400 m) | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||||
| Level two (400-800 m) | 3.48 | 1.69-7.19 | 2.96 | 1.34-6.57 | 1.27 | 1.05-2.92 | 1.21 | 1.47-3.13 |
| Level three (800 m +) | 4.98 | 2.55-9.72 | 3.32 | 1.47-7.48 | 1.79 | 1.17-3.68 | 1.60 | 1.26-4.10 |
|
| ||||||||
|
| ||||||||
| No | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||||
| Yes | 1.79 | 1.04-3.79 | 1.43 | .59-3.49 | 2.34 | 1.10-5.01 | 1.71 | .71- 4.11 |
|
| ||||||||
| No | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||||
| Yes | 2.23 | 1.22-4.06 | 1.69 | 1.29-2.81 | 1.79 | 1.14-3.42 | 1.91 | 1.28-2.93 |
|
| ||||||||
| No | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||||
| Yes | 2.11 | 1.22-3.67 | 1.49 | 1.07-2.89 | 3.68 | 1.87-7.25 | 3.59 | 1.63 -7.92 |
|
| ||||||||
|
| ||||||||
| Primary education or lower | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||||
| Secondary education | .35 | .17-.72 | .90 | .38-2.14 | .81 | .35-1.82 | 2.42 | .83-7.00 |
| Postsecondary education | .42 | .12-1.56 | .85 | .18-4.02 | .74 | .15-3.62 | 2.64 | .40-17.26 |
|
| ||||||||
| Low | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||||
| Medium | .47 | .17-1.25 | .51 | .17-1.52 | 1.22 | .43-3.47 | 1.77 | .56-5.59 |
| High | .63 | .35-1.12 | .85 | .43-1.67 | .55 | .27-1.13 | .68 | .30-1.53 |
|
| ||||||||
| Traditional pit toilets | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||||
| Fairly improved toilets | .48 | .24-.95 | 1.06 | .46-2.44 | .61 | .26-1.42 | .75 | .27-2.05 |
| Modern toilets | .41 | .13-.92 | 1.00 | .24-4.12 | .22 | .03-1.77 | .19 | .02 -1.90 |
|
| ||||||||
| Piped water at home | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||||
| No piped at home | 3.33 | 1.74-6.38 | 1.96 | .89- 4.32 | 1.84 | .83-4.07 | 1.26 | .48 -3.30 |
*The test indicates a significant at association at 95% level of confidence.
OR: Odds Ratio.
CI: Confidence Interval.