Successes, challenges, and support for men versus women implementers in water, sanitation, and hygiene programs: A qualitative study in rural Nepal

Implementing a Community-Led Arsenic Mitigation Intervention for Private Well Users in American Indian Communities: A Qualitative Evaluation of the Strong Heart Water Study Program

Arsenic is a naturally occurring toxicant in groundwater, which increases cancer and cardiovascular disease risk. American Indian populations are disproportionately exposed to arsenic in drinking water. The Strong Heart Water Study (SHWS), through a community-centered approach for intervention development and implementation, delivered an arsenic mitigation program for private well users in American Indian communities. The SHWS program comprised community-led water arsenic testing, point-of-use arsenic filter installation, and a mobile health program to promote sustained filter use and maintenance (i.e., changing the filter cartridge). Half of enrolled households received additional in-person behavior change communication and videos. Our objectives for this study were to assess successes, barriers, and facilitators in the implementation, use, and maintenance of the program among implementers and recipients. We conducted 45 semi-structured interviews with implementers and SHWS program recipients. We analyzed barriers and facilitators using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and the Risks, Attitudes, Norms, Abilities, and Self-regulation model. At the implementer level, facilitators included building rapport and trust between implementers and participating households. Barriers included the remoteness of households, coordinating with community plumbers for arsenic filter installation, and difficulty securing a local supplier for replacement filter cartridges. At the recipient level, facilitators included knowledge of the arsenic health risks, perceived effectiveness of the filter, and visual cues to promote habit formation. Barriers included attitudes towards water taste and temperature and inability to procure or install replacement filter cartridges. This study offers insights into the successes and challenges of implementing an arsenic mitigation program tailored to American Indian households, which can inform future programs in partnership with these and potentially similar affected communities. Our study suggests that building credibility and trust between implementers and participants is important for the success of arsenic mitigation programs.

Adaptation in rural water, sanitation, and hygiene programs: A qualitative study in Nepal

Adaptations are modifications made to programming to improve effectiveness or contextual fit, and are important for program improvement. However, adaptations can be detrimental if they do not preserve an intervention's underlying theory of change. We present a case study of 45 adaptations made to rural WaSH programming in Nepal, identified through qualitative interviews with implementers conducted in June through August 2019. For each adaptation, we characterized its target outcomes and implementers' motivations for making the adaptation, and we assessed the adaptation's intended and unintended effects on program quality. Participants described adaptations to both interventions (e.g., changes to hygiene promotion messages) and implementation strategies (e.g., sanctions to enforce toilet construction, such as denying work permits to households without a toilet). Adoption was the most common target outcome, specifically increasing toilet construction. Other target outcomes included feasibility of program delivery, acceptability of messages or WaSH products, reach of program activities in the community, and sustainability. Implementers were commonly motivated by intense pressure to meet national open defecation free targets. Most adaptations achieved their target outcomes. However, sanctions adaptations had substantial unintended negative effects. Implementers reported that sanctions were unpopular with communities and had poor sustainability. In contrast, non-sanctions adaptations that targeted outcomes of feasibility, acceptability, and sustainability had few unintended negative consequences. Our findings suggest that adaptations to promote rapid adoption of toilet construction do not consistently achieve sustained behavior change. Furthermore, adaptations to improve feasibility of program delivery or cost and acceptability of WaSH products can indirectly improve adoption even when it is not an explicit target outcome.

Adaptation of Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene Interventions: A Model and Scoping Review of Key Concepts and Tools

Background

Safe water, sanitation, and hygiene (WaSH) is important for health, livelihoods, and economic development, but WaSH programs have often underdelivered on expected health benefits. Underperformance has been attributed partly to poor ability to retain effectiveness following adaptation to facilitate WaSH programs' implementation in diverse contexts. Adaptation of WaSH interventions is common but often not done systematically, leading to poor outcomes. Models and frameworks from the adaptation literature have potential to improve WaSH adaptation to facilitate implementation and retain effectiveness. However, these models and frameworks were designed in a healthcare context, and WaSH interventions are typically implemented outside traditional health system channels. The purpose of our work was to develop an adaptation model tailored specifically to the context of WaSH interventions.

Methods

We conducted a scoping review to identify key adaptation steps and identify tools to support systematic adaptation. To identify relevant literature, we conducted a citation search based on three recently published reviews on adaptation. We also conducted a systematic database search for examples of WaSH adaptation. We developed a preliminary model based on steps commonly identified across models in adaptation literature, and then tailored the model to the WaSH context using studies yielded by our systematic search. We compiled a list of tools to support systematic data collection and decision-making throughout adaptation from all included studies.

Results and Conclusions

Our model presents adaptation steps in five phases: intervention selection, assessment, preparation, implementation, and sustainment. Phases for assessment through sustainment are depicted as iterative, reflecting that once an intervention is selected, adaptation is a continual process. Our model reflects the specific context of WaSH by including steps to engage non-health and lay implementers and to build consensus among diverse stakeholders with potentially competing priorities. We build on prior adaptation literature by compiling tools to support systematic data collection and decision-making, and we describe how they can be used throughout adaptation steps. Our model is intended to improve program outcomes by systematizing adaptation processes and provides an example of how systematic adaptation can occur for interventions with health goals but that are implemented outside conventional health system channels.