| Literature DB >> 26248869 |
M C Freeman1, A N Chard2, B Nikolay3, J V Garn4, C Okoyo5, J Kihara6, S M Njenga7, R L Pullan8, S J Brooker9, C S Mwandawiro10.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Soil-transmitted helminths, a class of parasitic intestinal worms, are pervasive in many low-income settings. Infection among children can lead to poor nutritional outcomes, anaemia, and reduced cognition. Mass treatment, typically administered through schools, with yearly or biannual drugs is inexpensive and can reduce worm burden, but reinfection can occur rapidly. Access to and use of sanitation facilities and proper hygiene can reduce infection, but rigorous data are scarce. Among school-age children, infection can occur at home or at school, but little is known about the relative importance of WASH in transmission in these two settings.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26248869 PMCID: PMC4528701 DOI: 10.1186/s13071-015-1024-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasit Vectors ISSN: 1756-3305 Impact factor: 3.876
Pupil, household, and school WASH characteristics overall and stratified by county, Kenya, January-April 2012
| Overall ( | Coast ( | Rift Valley ( | Western ( | Nyanza ( | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N (%) or mean (SD) | N (%) or mean (SD) | N (%) or mean (SD) | N (%) or mean (SD) | N (%) or mean (SD) | |
| STH infection | |||||
| Any STH infection | 1,614 (32.7 %) | 304 (23.3 %) | 263 (36.4 %) | 631 (41.4 %) | 416 (30.2 %) |
| Hookworm prevalence | 824 (16.7 %) | 240 (18.4 %) | 16 (2.2 %) | 374 (24.5 %) | 194 (14.1 %) |
| Hookworm infection intensity¶ | 153.3 | 93.5 | 111.1 | 360.6 | 55.8 |
|
| 880 (17.9 %) | 14 (1.1 %) | 232 (32.1 %) | 381 (25.0 %) | 253 (18.4 %) |
|
| 2754.5 | 144.1 | 4012.8 | 2972.6 | 2047.8 |
|
| 302 (6.1 %) | 90 (6.9 %) | 44 (6.1 %) | 132 (8.7 %) | 36 (2.6 %) |
|
| 94.4 | 45.2 | 127.6 | 184.7 | 35.1 |
| Individual and household characteristics | |||||
| Girl | 2,508 (50.9 %) | 683 (52.3 %) | 363 (50.9 %) | 771 (50.5 %) | 691 (50.2 %) |
| Age | 10.8 (2.1) | 10.9 (2.1) | 10.8 (2.2) | 10.8 (2.1) | 10.7 (2.0) |
| Number of people living pupil’s household | 6.9 (2.3) | 6.8 (2.4) | 7.2 (2.2) | 6.6 (2.2) | 7.2 (2.2) |
| Shoe-wearing | 2,307 (46.9 %) | 687 (52.8 %) | 387 (53.7 %) | 571 (37.5 %) | 662 (48.2 %) |
| Soil-eating behaviour | 838 (17.2 %) | 131 (10.1 %) | 71 (9.8 %) | 237 (15.5 %) | 399 (29.0 %) |
| Improved water source | 2,692 (54.7 %) | 998 (76.7 %) | 187 (25.9 %) | 788 (51.7 %) | 719 (52.3 %) |
| Toilet/latrine available | 4,123 (84.7 %) | 974 (75.0 %) | 647 (89.7 %) | 1,425 (93.7 %) | 1,077 (81.3 %) |
| Hand-washing facility with soap and water always available | 1,373 (27.9 %) | 359 (27.6 %) | 209 (29.2 %) | 365 (24.0 %) | 440 (32.0 %) |
| Tissue/water for anal cleansing always available | 2,259 (45.9 %) | 991 (76.1 %) | 340 (47.1 %) | 363 (23.8 %) | 565 (41.1 %) |
| School characteristics | Overall (n = 70) | Coast (n = 19) | Rift Valley (n = 10) | Western (n = 21) | Nyanza (n = 20) |
| Number of children in school | 605.3 (339.5) | 562.7 (456.2) | 474.9 (209.6) | 819.6 (262.3) | 485.8 (227.3) |
| Improved water source | 54 (77.1 %) | 17 (89.5 %) | 9 (90.0 %) | 16 (76.2 %) | 12 (60.0 %) |
| VIP latrine | 7 (10.0 %) | 4 (21.1 %) | 0 (0.0 %) | 0 (0.0 %) | 3 (15.0 %) |
| Pupils per latrine | 47.1 (39.6) | 41.8 (29.1) | 54.0 (48.3) | 44.0 (22.8) | 51.9 (56.0) |
| Hand-washing facility with soap and water always available§ | 2 (2.9 %) | 0 (0.0 %) | 0 (0.0 %) | 0 (0.0 %) | 2 (10.0 %) |
| Drinking water always available§ | 15 (21.4 %) | 2 (10.5 %) | 1 (10.0 %) | 8 (38.1 %) | 4 (20.0 %) |
| Tissue/water for anal cleansing always available§ | 4 (5.7 %) | 4 (21.1 %) | 0 (0.0 %) | 0 (0.0 %) | 0 (0.0 %) |
| Latrine sanitation: cleanliness* | 0.001 (0.97) | 0.15 (0.59) | −0.82 (2.08) | −0.03 (0.61) | 0.31 (0.36) |
| Latrine sanitation: structural integrity* | −0.04 (1.00) | 0.05 (0.93) | −0.59 (1.00) | 0.59 (0.95) | −0.51 (0.73) |
¶ measured using eggs per gram of faeces and displayed as geometric mean; §school-aggregated proportion of pupil-reported characteristics “always” available; *A higher score indicates better cleanliness/structural integrity;
Fig. 1Prevalence of infection for combined helminth infection and individual species
Fig. 2Prevalence of school and household water and sanitation conditions
Univariable associations between WASH conditions and STH infection among school children in Kenya, 2012 (n = 4,931)
*Defined as infection by at least one of the following: hookworm, A. lumbricoides, T. trichiura. †Improved sources are defined by the UNICEF/WHO joint monitoring programme (wssinfo.org). ¶OR and IRR represents the change in infection for each ten unit increase in a school’s pupil per latrine ratio. §Higher score indicates greater cleanliness/structural integrity. Grey color or hatch fill indicates a significant association between groups at p < 0.05, as shown in the key above. p-values for prevalence estimates based on random effects logistic regression; p-values for infection intensity estimates based on random effects negative binomial regression. ¶ Measured using eggs per gram of faeces
Multivariable associations between WASH conditions and STH infectiona among school children in Kenya, 2012 (n = 4,931)
| OR | 95 % CI | p | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Individual and household variables | |||
| Shoe-wearing |
|
|
|
| Soil-eating behaviour | 1.11 | 0.91, 1.34 | 0.29 |
| Improved water source available† | 0.92 | 0.78, 1.08 | 0.31 |
| Toilet/latrine available |
|
|
|
| Hand-washing facilities with soap and water availability |
|
|
|
| Tissue/water always available for anal cleansing | 0.97 | 0.83, 1.15 | 0.76 |
| School variables | |||
| Improved water source available† | 0.66 | 0.43, 1.00 | 0.05 |
| VIP sanitation facility |
|
|
|
| Pupil per latrine ratio¶ | 0.98 | 0.94, 1.02 | 0.36 |
| Hand-washing facility with soap and water availability |
|
|
|
| Drinking water always available | 0.95 | 0.66, 1.38 | 0.80 |
| Tissue/water always available for anal cleansing |
|
|
|
| Latrine sanitation: latrine cleanliness§ | 0.99 | 0.85, 1.15 | 0.87 |
| Latrine sanitation: structural integrity§ | 0.88 | 0.74, 1.03 | 0.12 |
aDefined as infection by at least one of the following: hookworm, A. lumbricoides, T. trichiura. †Improved sources are defined by the UNICEF/WHO joint monitoring programme (wssinfo.org). ¶OR and IRR represents the change in infection for each ten unit increase in a school’s pupil per latrine ratio. §Higher score indicates greater cleanliness/structural integrity. associations indicate a significant association at p < .05. p-values based on random effects logistic regression (infection) and random effects negative binomial regression (infection intensity). Models control for province, pupil demographics (age, sex, number of people living in the pupil’s household, and household wealth); climate/ecology (temperature, precipitation, land cover, population density); and the number of students in the pupil’s school
Multivariable associations between WASH conditions and hookworm infection and infection intensity among school children in Kenya, 2012 (n = 4,931)
| Infection | Infection Intensity | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR | 95 % CI | p | IRR | 95 % CI | p | |
| Individual and household variables | ||||||
| Shoe-wearing | 0.96 | 0.79, 1.17 | 0.69 | 0.96 | 0.82, 1.11 | 0.58 |
| Soil-eating behaviour |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Improved water source available† | 1.01 | 0.82, 1.23 | 0.95 | 1.03 | 0.87, 1.22 | 0.74 |
| Toilet/latrine available |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Hand-washing facilities with soap and water availability |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Tissue/water always available for anal cleansing | 0.90 | 0.73, 1.11 | 0.32 | 0.94 | 0.79, 1.12 | 0.48 |
| School variables | ||||||
| Improved water source available† | 1.08 | 0.52, 2.24 | 0.83 | 0.90 | 0.70, 1.16 | 0.42 |
| VIP sanitation facility | 0.54 | 0.22, 1.32 | 0.18 |
|
|
|
| Pupil per latrine ratio¶ | 1.01 | 0.94, 1.08 | 0.84 |
|
|
|
| Hand-washing facilities with soap and water availability | 0.48 | 0.21, 1.10 | 0.08 | 0.81 | 0.60, 1.10 | 0.18 |
| Drinking water always available | 0.95 | 0.50, 1.79 | 0.86 | 0.93 | 0.76, 1.15 | 0.51 |
| Tissue/water always available for anal cleansing | 0.37 | 0.09, 1.48 | 0.16 |
|
|
|
| Latrine sanitation: latrine cleanliness§ | 1.36 | 0.90, 2.05 | 0.15 |
|
|
|
| Latrine sanitation: structural integrity§ | 1.02 | 0.76, 1.37 | 0.91 | 0.95 | 0.86, 1.05 | 0.31 |
†Improved sources are defined by the UNICEF/WHO joint monitoring programme (wssinfo.org). ¶OR and IRR represents the change in infection for each ten unit increase in a school’s pupil per latrine ratio. §Higher score indicates greater cleanliness/structural integrity. Bold italicized associations indicate a significant association at p < .05. p-values based on random effects logistic regression (infection) and random effects negative binomial regression (infection intensity). Models control for province, pupil demographics (age, sex, number of people living in the pupil’s household, and household wealth); climate/ecology (temperature, precipitation, land cover, population density); and the number of students in the pupil’s school
Multivariable associations between WASH conditions and A. lumbricoides infection and infection intensity among school children in Kenya, 2012 (n = 4,931)
| Infection | Infection Intensity | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR | 95 % CI | p | IRR | 95 % CI | p | |
| Individual and household variables | ||||||
| Shoe-wearing |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Soil-eating behaviour | 1.12 | 0.87, 1.45 | 0.38 | 1.04 | 0.87, 1.25 | 0.67 |
| Improved water source available† | 0.94 | 0.77, 1.16 | 0.58 | 0.86 | 0.74, 1.01 | 0.07 |
| Toilet/latrine available | 0.83 | 0.60, 1.14 | 0.25 |
|
|
|
| Hand-washing facilities with soap and water availability | 1.05 | 0.82, 1.35 | 0.68 | 1.01 | 0.83, 1.23 | 0.89 |
| Tissue/water always available for anal cleansing | 0.97 | 0.77, 1.21 | 0.77 | 0.96 | 0.80, 1.15 | 0.66 |
| School variables | ||||||
| Improved water source available† |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| VIP sanitation facility | 0.38 | 0.12, 1.21 | 0.10 |
|
|
|
| Pupil per latrine ratio¶ | 0.96 | 0.89, 1.03 | 0.22 |
|
|
|
| Hand-washing facilities with soap and water availability | 0.69 | 0.31, 1.55 | 0.37 | 0.83 | 0.61, 1.13 | 0.23 |
| Drinking water always available | 0.97 | 0.51, 1.81 | 0.91 | 1.14 | 0.94, 1.39 | 0.19 |
| Tissue/water always available for anal cleansing | 0.19 | 0.02, 1.72 | 0.14 | 0.30 | 0.06, 1.43 | 0.13 |
| Latrine sanitation: latrine cleanliness§ | 0.92 | 0.72, 1.19 | 0.54 |
|
|
|
| Latrine sanitation: structural integrity§ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
†Improved sources are defined by the UNICEF/WHO joint monitoring programme (wssinfo.org). ¶OR and IRR represents the change in infection for each ten unit increase in a school’s pupil per latrine ratio. §Higher score indicates greater cleanliness/structural integrity. Bold italicized associations indicate a significant association at p < .05. p-values based on random effects logistic regression (infection) and random effects negative binomial regression (infection intensity). Models control for province, pupil demographics (age, sex, number of people living in the pupil’s household, and household wealth); climate/ecology (temperature, precipitation, land cover, population density); and the number of students in the pupil’s school