Peter Milton Rukundo1, Byaruhanga Rukooko2, Bård Anders Andreassen3, Per Ole Iversen4. 1. Department of Human Nutrition and Home Economics, Kyambogo University, Kampala, Uganda; Department of Nutrition, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, University of Oslo, 1046 Blindern, 0317 Oslo, Norway. Electronic address: rukpeter@gmail.com. 2. School of Liberal and Performing Arts, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda. Electronic address: brukooko@chuss.mak.ac.ug. 3. Norwegian Centre for Human Rights, Faculty of Law, University of Oslo, Norway. Electronic address: b.a.andreassen@nchr.uio.no. 4. Department of Nutrition, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, University of Oslo, 1046 Blindern, 0317 Oslo, Norway; Department of Haematology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway; Division of Human Nutrition, Stellenbosch University of Tygerberg, South Africa. Electronic address: p.o.iversen@medisin.uio.no.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The major landslide of 2010 in Bududa district in Eastern Uganda is the most catastrophic natural disaster in Uganda's recorded history. An estimated 350 people died and some of the affected were resettled in Kiryandongo district. We assessed housing, water and sanitation practises of affected households and controls to establish possible implications on food insecurity and diet diversity. METHODS: This cross-sectional study assessed 1078 affected and control households in Bududa and Kiryandongo districts. The head of the households were either affected, selected from landslide disaster-affected communities, or controls from a random sub-county bordering the affected. Structured interviews were used and entries were tested statistically to report crude estimates based on the Pearson x2 and ANOVA, while adjusted analysis used multivariate analysis of co-variance (MANCOVA) and Wald's Odds Ratio (OR) of Binary Logistic Regression at the 95% CI. RESULTS: On adjusting for the disaster and covariates, households who had insufficient access to water scored higher mean (SE) on food insecurity than those who reported sufficient access: 13.1 (0.4) vs. 9.5 (0.3) (P < 0.01). Intriguingly, households who owned a toilet and those who reported always using soap to wash hands scored higher food insecurity than their counterparts: 11.1 (0.3) vs. 9.0 (0.6) (P < 0.01) and 11.3 (0.3) vs. 9.1 (0.5) (P < 0.01), respectively. However, not owning a toilet increased the likelihood of being food insecure (OR 3.43; 95% CI 1.31, 8.97; P = 0.02). In Kiryandongo, affected households scored higher food insecurity than controls: 9.5 (0.5) vs. 5.4 (0.5) (P < 0.01) and higher diet diversity scores (DDS): 6.7 (0.2) vs. 6.2 (0.2) (P = 0.04). Type of housing also predicted food insecurity (P < 0.01) and DDS (P = 0.03). Like Bududa, households with insufficient water access scored higher food insecurity while those owning toilet scored higher DDS. Uniquely, only number of rooms was linked to a high likelihood of being food insecure (OR 1.60; 95% CI 1.19, 2.15; P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Disaster, food security and diet were sensitive to housing, water and sanitation and were integral to an adequate standard of living of victims of this landslide.
BACKGROUND: The major landslide of 2010 in Bududa district in Eastern Uganda is the most catastrophic natural disaster in Uganda's recorded history. An estimated 350 peopledied and some of the affected were resettled in Kiryandongo district. We assessed housing, water and sanitation practises of affected households and controls to establish possible implications on food insecurity and diet diversity. METHODS: This cross-sectional study assessed 1078 affected and control households in Bududa and Kiryandongo districts. The head of the households were either affected, selected from landslide disaster-affected communities, or controls from a random sub-county bordering the affected. Structured interviews were used and entries were tested statistically to report crude estimates based on the Pearson x2 and ANOVA, while adjusted analysis used multivariate analysis of co-variance (MANCOVA) and Wald's Odds Ratio (OR) of Binary Logistic Regression at the 95% CI. RESULTS: On adjusting for the disaster and covariates, households who had insufficient access to water scored higher mean (SE) on food insecurity than those who reported sufficient access: 13.1 (0.4) vs. 9.5 (0.3) (P < 0.01). Intriguingly, households who owned a toilet and those who reported always using soap to wash hands scored higher food insecurity than their counterparts: 11.1 (0.3) vs. 9.0 (0.6) (P < 0.01) and 11.3 (0.3) vs. 9.1 (0.5) (P < 0.01), respectively. However, not owning a toilet increased the likelihood of being food insecure (OR 3.43; 95% CI 1.31, 8.97; P = 0.02). In Kiryandongo, affected households scored higher food insecurity than controls: 9.5 (0.5) vs. 5.4 (0.5) (P < 0.01) and higher diet diversity scores (DDS): 6.7 (0.2) vs. 6.2 (0.2) (P = 0.04). Type of housing also predicted food insecurity (P < 0.01) and DDS (P = 0.03). Like Bududa, households with insufficient water access scored higher food insecurity while those owning toilet scored higher DDS. Uniquely, only number of rooms was linked to a high likelihood of being food insecure (OR 1.60; 95% CI 1.19, 2.15; P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Disaster, food security and diet were sensitive to housing, water and sanitation and were integral to an adequate standard of living of victims of this landslide.
Authors: Mohammad Ashraful Islam; Mahfuzur Rahman; Haribondhu Sarma; Md Fakhar Uddin; Md Tariqujjaman; Gobinda Karmakar; Mohammad Ashikur Rahman; Matthew Kelly; Darren Gray; Tahmeed Ahmed Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2022-05-31 Impact factor: 4.135