Estimating the Effect of School Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene Improvements on Pupil Health Outcomes

Interventions to improve sanitation for preventing diarrhoea

BACKGROUND

Diarrhoea is a major contributor to the global disease burden, particularly amongst children under five years in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). As many of the infectious agents associated with diarrhoea are transmitted through faeces, sanitation interventions to safely contain and manage human faeces have the potential to reduce exposure and diarrhoeal disease.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of sanitation interventions for preventing diarrhoeal disease, alone or in combination with other WASH interventions.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, and Chinese language databases available under the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI-CAJ). We also searched the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) and conference proceedings, contacted researchers, and searched references of included studies. The last search date was 16 February 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, non-randomized controlled trials (NRCTs), controlled before-and-after studies (CBAs), and matched cohort studies of interventions aimed at introducing or expanding the coverage and/or use of sanitation facilities in children and adults in any country or population. Our primary outcome of interest was diarrhoea and secondary outcomes included dysentery (bloody diarrhoea), persistent diarrhoea, hospital or clinical visits for diarrhoea, mortality, and adverse events. We included sanitation interventions whether they were conducted independently or in combination with other interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed eligible studies, extracted relevant data, assessed risk of bias, and assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. We used meta-analyses to estimate pooled measures of effect, described results narratively, and investigated potential sources of heterogeneity using subgroup analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-one studies met our inclusion criteria, with a total of 238,535 participants. Of these, 50 studies had sufficient information to be included in quantitative meta-analysis, including 17 cluster-RCTs and 33 studies with non-randomized study designs (20 NRCTs, one CBA, and 12 matched cohort studies). Most were conducted in LMICs and 86% were conducted in whole or part in rural areas. Studies covered three broad types of interventions: (1) providing access to any sanitation facility to participants without existing access practising open defecation, (2) improving participants' existing sanitation facility, or (3) behaviour change messaging to improve sanitation access or practices without providing hardware or subsidy, although many studies overlapped multiple categories. There was substantial heterogeneity amongst individual study results for all types of interventions. Providing access to any sanitation facility Providing access to sanitation facilities was evaluated in seven cluster-RCTs, and may reduce diarrhoea prevalence in all age groups (risk ratio (RR) 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.73 to 1.08; 7 trials, 40,129 participants, low-certainty evidence). In children under five years, access may have little or no effect on diarrhoea prevalence (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.16, 4 trials, 16,215 participants, low-certainty evidence). Additional analysis in non-randomized studies was generally consistent with these findings. Pooled estimates across randomized and non-randomized studies provided similar protective estimates (all ages: RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.94; 15 studies, 73,511 participants; children < 5 years: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.02; 11 studies, 25,614 participants).  Sanitation facility improvement Interventions designed to improve existing sanitation facilities were evaluated in three cluster-RCTs in children under five and may reduce diarrhoea prevalence (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.06; 3 trials, 14,900 participants, low-certainty evidence). However, some of these interventions, such as sewerage connection, are not easily randomized. Non-randomized studies across participants of all ages provided estimates that improving sanitation facilities may reduce diarrhoea, but may be subject to confounding (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.74; 23 studies, 117,639 participants, low-certainty evidence). Pooled estimates across randomized and non-randomized studies provided similar protective estimates (all ages: RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.78; 26 studies, 132,539 participants; children < 5 years: RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.91, 12 studies, 23,353 participants).  Behaviour change messaging only (no hardware or subsidy provided) Strategies to promote behaviour change to construct, upgrade, or use sanitation facilities were evaluated in seven cluster-RCTs in children under five, and probably reduce diarrhoea prevalence (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.98; 7 studies, 28,909 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). Additional analysis from two non-randomized studies found no effect, though with very high uncertainty. Pooled estimates across randomized and non-randomized studies provided similar protective estimates (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.01; 9 studies, 31,080 participants). No studies measured the effects of this type of intervention in older populations.  Any sanitation intervention A pooled analysis of cluster-RCTs across all sanitation interventions demonstrated that the interventions may reduce diarrhoea prevalence in all ages (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.95, 17 trials, 83,938 participants, low-certainty evidence) and children under five (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.97; 14 trials, 60,024 participants, low-certainty evidence). Non-randomized comparisons also demonstrated a protective effect, but may be subject to confounding. Pooled estimates across randomized and non-randomized studies provided similar protective estimates (all ages: RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.82; 50 studies, 237,130 participants; children < 5 years: RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.89; 32 studies, 80,047 participants). In subgroup analysis, there was some evidence of larger effects in studies with increased coverage amongst all participants (75% or higher coverage levels) and also some evidence that the effect decreased over longer follow-up times for children under five years. There was limited evidence on other outcomes. However, there was some evidence that any sanitation intervention was protective against dysentery (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.00; 5 studies, 34,025 participants) and persistent diarrhoea (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.75; 2 studies, 2665 participants), but not against clinic visits for diarrhoea (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.67; 2 studies, 3720 participants) or all-cause mortality (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.89 to1.09; 7 studies, 46,123 participants).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence that sanitation interventions are effective at preventing diarrhoea, both for young children and all age populations. The actual level of effectiveness, however, varies by type of intervention and setting. There is a need for research to better understand the factors that influence effectiveness.

Interventions to improve water, sanitation, and hygiene for preventing soil-transmitted helminth infection

BACKGROUND

It is estimated that 1.5 billion people are infected with soil-transmitted helminths (STHs) worldwide. Re-infection occurs rapidly following deworming, and interruption of transmission is unlikely without complementary control efforts such as improvements in water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) access and behaviours.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of WASH interventions to prevent STH infection.

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 19 October 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included interventions to improve WASH access or practices in communities where STHs are endemic. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), as well as trials with an external control group where participants (or clusters) were allocated to different interventions using a non-random method (non-RCTs). We did not include observational study designs. Our primary outcome was prevalence of any STH infection. Prevalence of individual worms was a secondary outcome, including for Ascaris lumbricoides, Trichuris trichiura, hookworm (Ancylostoma duodenale or Necator americanus), or Strongyloides stercoralis. Intensity of infection, measured as a count of eggs per gram of faeces for each species, was another secondary outcome.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently reviewed titles and abstracts and full-text records for eligibility, performed data extraction, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool for RCTs and the EPOC tool for non-RCTs. We used a random-effects meta-analysis to pool study estimates. We used Moran's I² statistic to assess heterogeneity and conducted subgroup analyses to explore sources of heterogeneity. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 32 studies (16 RCTs and 16 non-RCTs) involving a total of 52,944 participants in the review. Twenty-two studies (14 RCTs (16 estimates) and eight non-RCTs (11 estimates)) reported on our primary outcome, prevalence of infection with at least one STH species. Twenty-one studies reported on the prevalence of A lumbricoides (12 RCTs and 9 non-RCTs); 17 on the prevalence of T trichiura (9 RCTs and 8 non-RCTs); 18 on the prevalence of hookworm (10 RCTs and 8 non-RCTs); and one on the prevalence of S stercoralis (1 non-RCT). Sixteen studies measured the intensity of infection for an individual STH type. Ten RCTs and five non-RCTs reported on the intensity of infection of A lumbricoides; eight RCTs and five non-RCTs measured the intensity of infection of T trichiura; and eight RCTs and five non-RCTs measured the intensity of hookworm infection. No studies reported on the intensity of infection of S stercoralis. The overall pooled effect estimates showed that the WASH interventions under study may result in a slight reduction of any STH infection, with an odds ratio (OR) of 0.86 amongst RCTs (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74 to 1.01; moderate-certainty evidence) and an OR of 0.71 amongst non-RCTs (95% CI 0.54 to 0.94; low-certainty evidence). All six of the meta-analyses assessing individual worm infection amongst both RCTs and non-RCTs had pooled estimates in the preventive direction, although all CIs encapsulated the null, leaving the possibility of the null or even harmful effects; the certainty of the evidence ranged from very low to moderate. Individual studies assessing intensity of infection showed mixed evidence supporting WASH. Subgroup analyses focusing on narrow specific subsets of water, sanitation, and hygiene interventions did very little to elucidate which interventions might be better than others. Data on intensity of infection (e.g. faecal egg count) were reported in a variety of ways across studies, precluding the pooling of results for this outcome. We did not find any studies reporting adverse events resulting from the WASH interventions under study or from mass drug administration (MDA).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Whilst the available evidence suggests that the WASH interventions under study may slightly protect against STH infection, WASH also serves as a broad preventive measure for many other diseases that have a faecal oral transmission route of transmission. As many of the studies were done in addition to MDA/deworming (i.e. MDA was ongoing in both the intervention and control arm), our data support WHO recommendations for implementation of improvements to basic sanitation and adequate access to safe water alongside MDA. The biological plausibility for improved access to WASH to interrupt transmission of STHs is clear, but WASH interventions as currently delivered have shown impacts that were lower than expected. There is a need for more rigorous and targeted implementation research and process evaluations in order that future WASH interventions can better provide benefit to users. Inconsistent reporting of the intensity of infection underscores the need to define the minimal, standard data that should be collected globally on STHs to enable pooled analyses and comparisons.

Interventions promoting uptake of water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) technologies in low- and middle-income countries: An evidence and gap map of effectiveness studies

Background

Lack of access to and use of water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) cause 1.6 million deaths every year, of which 1.2 million are due to gastrointestinal illnesses like diarrhoea and acute respiratory infections like pneumonia. Poor WASH access and use also diminish nutrition and educational attainment, and cause danger and stress for vulnerable populations, especially for women and girls. The hardest hit regions are sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 6 calls for the end of open defecation, and universal access to safely managed water and sanitation facilities, and basic hand hygiene, by 2030. WASH access and use also underpin progress in other areas such as SDG1 poverty targets, SDG3 health and SDG4 education targets. Meeting the SDG equity agenda to "leave none behind" will require WASH providers prioritise the hardest to reach including those living remotely and people who are disadvantaged.

Objectives

Decision makers need access to high-quality evidence on what works in WASH promotion in different contexts, and for different groups of people, to reach the most disadvantaged populations and thereby achieve universal targets. The WASH evidence map is envisioned as a tool for commissioners and researchers to identify existing studies to fill synthesis gaps, as well as helping to prioritise new studies where there are gaps in knowledge. It also supports policymakers and practitioners to navigate the evidence base, including presenting critically appraised findings from existing systematic reviews.

Methods

This evidence map presents impact evaluations and systematic reviews from the WASH sector, organised according to the types of intervention mechanisms, WASH technologies promoted, and outcomes measured. It is based on a framework of intervention mechanisms (e.g., behaviour change triggering or microloans) and outcomes along the causal pathway, specifically behavioural outcomes (e.g., handwashing and food hygiene practices), ill-health outcomes (e.g., diarrhoeal morbidity and mortality), nutrition and socioeconomic outcomes (e.g., school absenteeism and household income). The map also provides filters to examine the evidence for a particular WASH technology (e.g., latrines), place of use (e.g., home, school or health facility), location (e.g., global region, country, rural and urban) and group (e.g., people living with disability). Systematic searches for published and unpublished literature and trial registries were conducted of studies in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Searches were conducted in March 2018, and searches for completed trials were done in May 2020. Coding of information for the map was done by two authors working independently. Impact evaluations were critically appraised according to methods of conduct and reporting. Systematic reviews were critically appraised using a new approach to assess theory-based, mixed-methods evidence synthesis.

Results

There has been an enormous growth in impact evaluations and systematic reviews of WASH interventions since the International Year of Sanitation, 2008. There are now at least 367 completed or ongoing rigorous impact evaluations in LMICs, nearly three-quarters of which have been conducted since 2008, plus 43 systematic reviews. Studies have been done in 83 LMICs, with a high concentration in Bangladesh, India, and Kenya. WASH sector programming has increasingly shifted in focus from what technology to supply (e.g., a handwashing station or child's potty), to the best way in which to do so to promote demand. Research also covers a broader set of intervention mechanisms. For example, there has been increased interest in behaviour change communication using psychosocial "triggering", such as social marketing and community-led total sanitation. These studies report primarily on behavioural outcomes. With the advent of large-scale funding, in particular by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, there has been a substantial increase in the number of studies on sanitation technologies, particularly latrines. Sustaining behaviour is fundamental for sustaining health and other quality of life improvements. However, few studies have been done of intervention mechanisms for, or measuring outcomes on sustained adoption of latrines to stop open defaecation. There has also been some increase in the number of studies looking at outcomes and interventions that disproportionately affect women and girls, who quite literally carry most of the burden of poor water and sanitation access. However, most studies do not report sex disaggregated outcomes, let alone integrate gender analysis into their framework. Other vulnerable populations are even less addressed; no studies eligible for inclusion in the map were done of interventions targeting, or reporting on outcomes for, people living with disabilities. We were only able to find a single controlled evaluation of WASH interventions in a health care facility, in spite of the importance of WASH in health facilities in global policy debates. The quality of impact evaluations has improved, such as the use of controlled designs as standard, attention to addressing reporting biases, and adequate cluster sample size. However, there remain important concerns about quality of reporting. The quality and usefulness of systematic reviews for policy is also improving, which draw clearer distinctions between intervention mechanisms and synthesise the evidence on outcomes along the causal pathway. Adopting mixed-methods approaches also provides information for programmes on barriers and enablers affecting implementation.

Conclusion

Ensuring everyone has access to appropriate water, sanitation, and hygiene facilities is one of the most fundamental of challenges for poverty elimination. Researchers and funders need to consider carefully where there is the need for new primary evidence, and new syntheses of that evidence. This study suggests the following priority areas:Impact evaluations incorporating understudied outcomes, such as sustainability and slippage, of WASH provision in understudied places of use, such as health care facilities, and of interventions targeting, or presenting disaggregated data for, vulnerable populations, particularly over the life-course and for people living with a disability;Improved reporting in impact evaluations, including presentation of participant flow diagrams; andSynthesis studies and updates in areas with sufficient existing and planned impact evaluations, such as for diarrhoea mortality, ARIs, WASH in schools and decentralisation. These studies will preferably be conducted as mixed-methods systematic reviews that are able to answer questions about programme targeting, implementation, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, and compare alternative intervention mechanisms to achieve and sustain outcomes in particular contexts, preferably using network meta-analysis.

Drinking Water Quality Mapping Using Water Quality Index and Geospatial Analysis in Primary Schools of Pakistan

Primary school children in the developing world often lack potable water, which may result in a high burden of water-related diseases and poor school performance. The present study aimed to characterize the drinking water quality in primary schools of Pakistan. We used a multistage random-sampling method to select 425 primary schools from selected districts of Sindh province. Standard methods were used to characterize water quality. The results were compared with maximum acceptable values recommended by the Pakistani National Environmental Quality Standards (Pak NEQS) and the World Health Organization (WHO) drinking water quality standards. Groundwater (62%) and surface water (38%) were identified as two major drinking water sources in the selected schools with varying levels of water quality. Among all parameters, dissolved oxygen (DO), pH, and nitrate remained within WHO and Pak NEQS water quality standard limit, while total dissolved solids (TDS) (33%), electrical conductivity (EC) (46%), chloride (34%), turbidity (27%), and hardness (11%) samples exceeded standard limits. All dissolved salts had moderate to strong positive correlations with TDS and EC values. Based on a water quality index (WQI), 74% of primary schools had access to excellent or good quality drinking water compared to 26% of schools that had access to either poor, very poor or unsuitable drinking water. Among all three regions, more schools from South Sindh had either poor, very poor or unsuitable drinking water (33%) compared to the Central (25%) and North zones (15%). Hence, water from these locations is unfit for human consumption and these schools need better water quality management plans to stop the spread of water-related diseases in primary school children.

The impact of an operation and management intervention on toilet usability in schools in the Philippines: a cluster randomised controlled trial

Background

Access to usable water, sanitation and hygiene provision in schools is included within indicators in the Sustainable Development Goals. Progress towards these indicators is dependent on developing an understanding of which intervention components are most effective to operate and maintain usable services. This study aimed to determine the impact of a school toilet operation and management intervention in the Philippines on toilet usability and student and teacher satisfaction, adjusted for clustering at school level.

Methods

In a non-blinded cluster randomised controlled trial, we compared improvements in usability and cleanliness of school toilets among those schools receiving a low-cost, replicable intervention. Toilet usability was measured based on Sustainable Development Goal indicators related to school sanitation defined by the UNICEF/WHO Joint Monitoring Programme for Water, Sanitation and Hygiene. Intervention schools received consumables, support kits, and structured tools designed to facilitate operation and maintenance of sanitation facilities. The primary outcome, toilet usability and cleanliness, was compared through a difference-in-difference analysis of toilet usability. Secondary outcomes of student and teacher satisfaction were measured through a survey at endline. All outcomes were adjusted for clustering at school level.

Results

20 eligible schools in the Batangas region of the Philippines were randomly selected and allocated to either control or intervention group. We found that non-classroom toilets were 48% more likely to meet quality benchmarks in intervention schools, but this was not statistically significant. When including in-classroom toilets in the analysis, there were no significant differences in toilet usability - defined as accessible, functional, private and of high quality – between intervention and control schools. When stratified by toilet location, children in the intervention group clusters expressed a minor, but statistically significant increase in overall satisfaction with sanitation facilities (p = 0.035).

Conclusion

Water, sanitation and hygiene interventions in schools focusing on operation and maintenance showed potential to improve toilet usability, but universal achievement of SDG targets may require additional efforts addressing toilet infrastructure.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03204175, June 2017 prior to participant enrolment.

Interventions to improve disposal of child faeces for preventing diarrhoea and soil-transmitted helminth infection

BACKGROUND

Diarrhoea and soil-transmitted helminth (STH) infections represent a large disease burden worldwide, particularly in low-income countries. As the aetiological agents associated with diarrhoea and STHs are transmitted through faeces, the safe containment and management of human excreta has the potential to reduce exposure and disease. Child faeces may be an important source of exposure even among households with improved sanitation.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions to improve the disposal of child faeces for preventing diarrhoea and STH infections.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and 10 other databases. We also searched relevant conference proceedings, contacted researchers, searched websites for organizations, and checked references from identified studies. The date of last search was 27 September 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized controlled studies (NRS) that compared interventions aiming to improve the disposal of faeces of children aged below five years in order to decrease direct or indirect human contact with such faeces with no intervention or a different intervention in children and adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors selected eligible studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. We used meta-analyses to estimate pooled measures of effect where appropriate, or described the study results narratively. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixty-three studies covering more than 222,800 participants met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-two studies were cluster RCTs, four were controlled before-and-after studies (CBA), and 37 were NRS (27 case-control studies (one that included seven study sites), three controlled cohort studies, and seven controlled cross-sectional studies). Most study sites (56/69) were in low- or lower middle-income settings. Among studies using experimental study designs, most interventions included child faeces disposal messages along with other health education messages or other water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) hardware and software components. Among observational studies, the main risk factors relevant to this review were safe disposal of faeces in the latrine or defecation of children under five years of age in a latrine.Education and hygiene promotion interventions, including child faeces disposal messages (no hardware provision)Four RCTs found that diarrhoea incidence was lower, reducing the risk by an estimated 30% in children under six years old (rate ratio 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.59 to 0.86; 2 trials, low-certainty evidence). Diarrhoea prevalence measured in two other RCTs in children under five years of age was lower, but evidence was low-certainty (risk ratio (RR) 0.93, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.04; low-certainty evidence).Two controlled cohort studies that evaluated such an intervention in Bangladesh did not detect a difference on diarrhoea prevalence (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.28; very low-certainty evidence). Two controlled cross-sectional studies that evaluated the Health Extension Package in Ethiopia were associated with a lower two-week diarrhoea prevalence in 'model' households than in 'non-model households' (odds ratio (OR) 0.26, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.42; very low-certainty evidence).Programmes to end open defecation by all (termed community-led total sanitation (CLTS) interventions plus adaptations)Four RCTs measured diarrhoea prevalence and did not detect an effect in children under five years of age (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.07; moderate-certainty evidence). The analysis of two trials did not demonstrate an effect of the interventions on STH infection prevalence in children (pooled RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.65; low-certainty evidence).One controlled cross-sectional study compared the prevalence of STH infection in open defecation-free (ODF) villages that had received a CLTS intervention with control villages and reported a higher level of STH infection in the intervention villages (RR 2.51, 95% CI 1.74 to 3.62; very low-certainty evidence).Sanitation hardware and behaviour change interventions, that included child faeces disposal hardware and messagingTwo RCTs had mixed results, with no overall effect on diarrhoea prevalence demonstrated in the pooled analysis (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.26; very low-certainty evidence).WASH hardware and education/behaviour change interventionsOne RCT did not demonstrate an effect on diarrhoea prevalence (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.41; very low-certainty evidence).Two CBAs reported that the intervention reduced diarrhoea incidence by about a quarter in children under five years of age, but evidence was very low-certainty (rate ratio 0.77, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.84). Another CBA reported that the intervention reduced the prevalence of STH in an intervention village compared to a control village, again with GRADE assessed at very low-certainty (OR 0.17, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.73).Case-control studiesPooled results from case-control studies that presented data for child faeces disposal indicated that disposal of faeces in the latrine was associated with lower odds of diarrhoea among all ages (OR 0.73, 95% CI: 0.62 to 0.85; 23 comparisons; very low-certainty evidence). Pooled results from case-control studies that presented data for children defecating in the latrine indicated that children using the latrine was associated with lower odds of diarrhoea in all ages (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.90; 7 studies; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence suggests that the safe disposal of child faeces may be effective in preventing diarrhoea. However, the evidence is limited and of low certainty. The limited research on STH infections provides only low and very-low certainty evidence around effects, which means there is currently no reliable evidence that interventions to improve safe disposal of child faeces are effective in preventing such STH infections.While child faeces may represent a source of exposure to young children, interventions generally only address it as part of a broader sanitation initiative. There is a need for RCTs and other rigorous studies to assess the effectiveness and sustainability of different hardware and software interventions to improve the safe disposal of faeces of children of different age groups.

Impact of a school-based water, sanitation, and hygiene intervention on school absence, diarrhea, respiratory infection, and soil-transmitted helminths: results from the WASH HELPS cluster-randomized trial

Background

Water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) in schools is promoted by development agencies as a modality to improve school attendance by reducing illness. Despite biological plausibility, the few rigorous studies that have assessed the effect of WASH in schools (WinS) interventions on pupil health and school attendance have reported mixed impacts. We evaluated the impact of the Laos Basic Education, Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Programme – a comprehensive WinS project implemented by UNICEF Lao People’s Democratic Republic (Lao PDR) in 492 primary schools nationwide between 2013 and 2017 – on pupil education and health.

Methods

From 2014-2017, we conducted a cluster-randomized trial among 100 randomly selected primary schools lacking functional WASH facilities in Saravane Province, Lao PDR. Schools were randomly assigned to either the intervention (n = 50) or comparison (n = 50) arm. Intervention schools received a school water supply, sanitation facilities, handwashing facilities, drinking water filters, and behavior change education and promotion. Comparison schools received the intervention after research activities ended. At unannounced visits every six to eight weeks, enumerators recorded pupils’ roll-call absence, enrollment, attrition, progression to the next grade, and reported illness (diarrhea, respiratory infection, conjunctivitis), and conducted structured observations to measure intervention fidelity and adherence. Stool samples were collected annually prior to de-worming and analyzed for soil-transmitted helminth (STH) infection. In addition to our primary intention-to-treat analysis, we conducted secondary analyses to quantify the role of intervention fidelity and adherence on project impacts.

Results

We found no impact of the WinS intervention on any primary (pupil absence) or secondary (enrollment, dropout, grade progression, diarrhea, respiratory infection, conjunctivitis, STH infection) impacts. Even among schools with the highest levels of fidelity and adherence, impact of the intervention on absence and health was minimal.

Conclusions

While WinS may create an important enabling environment, WinS interventions alone and as currently delivered may not be sufficient to independently impact pupil education and health. Our results are consistent with other recent evaluations of WinS projects showing limited or mixed effects of WinS.

Design of a parallel cluster-randomized trial assessing the impact of a demand-side sanitation and hygiene intervention on sustained behavior change and mental well-being in rural and peri-urban Amhara, Ethiopia: Andilaye study protocol

Background

Unimproved water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) behaviors are key drivers of infectious disease transmission and influencers of mental well-being. While WASH is seen as a critical enabler of health, important knowledge gaps related to the content and delivery of effective, holistic WASH programming exist. Corresponding impacts of WASH on mental well-being are also underexplored. There is a need for more robust implementation research that yields information regarding whether and how community-based, demand-side interventions facilitate progressive and sustained adoption of improved sanitation and hygiene behaviors and downstream health impacts. The purpose of this protocol is to detail the rationale and design of a cluster-randomized trial evaluating the impact of a demand-side sanitation and hygiene intervention on sustained behavior change and mental well-being in rural and peri-urban Amhara, Ethiopia.

Methods

Together with partners, we developed a theoretically-informed, evidence-based behavioral intervention called Andilaye. We randomly selected and assigned 50 sub-districts (kebeles) from three purposively selected districts (woredas); half to receive the Andilaye intervention, and half the standard of care sanitation and hygiene programming (i.e., community-led total sanitation and hygiene [CLTSH]). During baseline, midline, and endline, we will collect data on an array of behavioral factors, potential moderators (e.g., water and sanitation insecurity, collective efficacy), and our primary study outcomes: sanitation and hygiene behaviors and mental well-being. We will perform a process evaluation to assess intervention fidelity and related attributes.

Discussion

While CLTSH has fostered sanitation and hygiene improvements in Ethiopia, evidence of behavioral slippage, or regression to unimproved practices in communities previously declared open defecation free exists. Other limitations of CLTSH, such as its focus on disgust, poor triggering, and over-saturation of Health Extension Workers have been documented. We employed rigorous formative research and practically applied social and behavioral theory to develop Andilaye, a scalable intervention designed to address these issues and complement existing service delivery within Ethiopia’s Health Extension Program. Evidence from this trial may help address knowledge gaps related to scalable alternatives to CLTSH and inform sanitation and hygiene programming and policy in Ethiopia and beyond.

Trial registration

This trial was registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03075436) on March 9, 2017.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12889-019-7040-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) in Schools in Low-Income Countries: A Review of Evidence of Impact

Many schools in low-income countries have inadequate access to water facilities, sanitation and hygiene promotion. A systematic review of literature was carried out that aimed to identify and analyse the impact of water, sanitation and hygiene interventions (WASH) in schools in low-income countries. Published peer reviewed literature was systematically screened during March to June 2018 using the databases PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, Science Direct, and Google Scholar. There were no publication date restrictions. Thirty-eight peer reviewed papers were identified that met the inclusion criteria. The papers were analysed in groups, based on four categories of reported outcomes: (i) reduction of diarrhoeal disease and other hygiene-related diseases in school students; (ii) improved WASH knowledge, attitudes and hygiene behaviours among students; (iii) reduced disease burden and improved hygiene behaviours in students’ households and communities; (iv) improved student enrolment and attendance. The typically unmeasured and unreported ‘output’ and/or ‘exposure’ of program fidelity and adherence was also examined. Several studies provide evidence of positive disease-related outcomes among students, yet other assessments did not find statistically significant differences in health or indicated that outcomes are dependent on the nature and context of interventions. Thirteen studies provide evidence of changes in WASH knowledge, attitudes and behaviours, such as hand-washing with soap. Further research is required to understand whether and how school-based WASH interventions might improve hygiene habits and health among wider family and community members. Evidence of the impact of school-based WASH programs in reducing student absence from school was mixed. Ensuring access to safe and sufficient water and sanitation and hygiene promotion in schools has great potential to improve health and education and to contribute to inclusion and equity, yet delivering school-based WASH intervention does not guarantee good outcomes. While further rigorous research will be of value, political will and effective interventions with high program fidelity are also key.

The impact of school water, sanitation, and hygiene improvements on infectious disease using serum antibody detection

Background

Evidence from recent studies assessing the impact of school water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) interventions on child health has been mixed. Self-reports of disease are subject to bias, and few WASH impact evaluations employ objective health measures to assess reductions in disease and exposure to pathogens. We utilized antibody responses from dried blood spots (DBS) to measure the impact of a school WASH intervention on infectious disease among pupils in Mali.

Methodology/Principal findings

We randomly selected 21 beneficiary primary schools and their 21 matched comparison schools participating in a matched-control trial of a comprehensive school-based WASH intervention in Mali. DBS were collected from 20 randomly selected pupils in each school (n = 807). We analyzed eluted IgG from the DBS using a Luminex multiplex bead assay to 28 antigens from 17 different pathogens. Factor analysis identified three distinct latent variables representing vector-transmitted disease (driven primarily by dengue), food/water-transmitted enteric disease (driven primarily by Escherichia coli and Vibrio cholerae), and person-to-person transmitted enteric disease (driven primarily by norovirus). Data were analyzed using a linear latent variable model. Antibody evidence of food/water-transmitted enteric disease (change in latent variable mean (β) = -0.24; 95% CI: -0.53, -0.13) and person-to-person transmitted enteric disease (β = -0.17; 95% CI: -0.42, -0.04) was lower among pupils attending beneficiary schools. There was no difference in antibody evidence of vector-transmitted disease (β = 0.11; 95% CI: -0.05, 0.33).

Conclusions/Significance

Evidence of enteric disease was lower among pupils attending schools benefitting from school WASH improvements than students attending comparison schools. These findings support results from the parent study, which also found reduced incidence of self-reported diarrhea among pupils of beneficiary schools. DBS collection was feasible in this resource-poor field setting and provided objective evidence of disease at a low cost per antigen analyzed, making it an effective measurement tool for the WASH field.

Trial registration

The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01787058)

Water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) in schools is promoted as an intervention to improve child health in low-resource settings. However, evidence of the impact of school WASH interventions on child health is mixed. One reason could be that most studies rely on self-reported disease symptoms, which are prone to bias. In order to objectively measure evidence of disease, we collected dried blood spots (DBS) from pupils attending schools participating in an impact evaluation of a comprehensive school WASH intervention in Mali, and analyzed the DBS for antibody responses to 28 antigens from 17 different pathogens. We found that evidence of enteric disease was lower among pupils attending beneficiary schools compared to pupils attending comparison schools. These results are consistent with those from the parent study, which also found reduced self-reported diarrhea among pupils attending beneficiary schools. Our results support WASH in schools as an effective intervention to improve child health. Further, DBS are a feasible measurement tool for the WASH field to provide objective evidence of disease.

The associations between water and sanitation and hookworm infection using cross-sectional data from Togo's national deworming program

Background

Sustainable control of soil-transmitted helminths requires a combination of chemotherapy treatment and environmental interventions, including access to safe drinking water, sufficient water for hygiene, use of clean sanitation facilities, and handwashing (WASH). We quantified associations between home-, school-, and community-level WASH characteristics and hookworm infection—both prevalence and eggs per gram of stool (intensity)—among Togolese school children in the context of community-based chemotherapy treatments administered in the country from 2010 through 2014.

Methodology/Principal findings

We analyzed data from two surveys conducted by the Togo Ministry of Health: a school-based survey of students aged 6–9 years across Togo conducted in 2009 and a follow-up survey in 2015, after four to five years of preventive chemotherapy. Data were available for 16,473 students attending 1,129 schools in 2009 and for 16,890 students from 1,126 schools in 2015. Between surveys, children in study schools received 0 to 8 rounds of deworming chemotherapy treatments. Few WASH conditions (only unimproved drinking water) were found to be significantly associated with the presence or absence of hookworms in an individual; however, quantitative eggs per gram of feces was associated with availability of unimproved drinking water, availability of improved drinking water either on or off school grounds, having a handwashing station with water available, and access to a sex-separate non-private or private latrine. The association between school WASH conditions and hookworm infection or burden often depended on the 2009 prevalence of infection, as more WASH characteristics were found to be significant predictors of infection among schools with high underlying endemicity of hookworm.

Conclusions/Significance

Our findings emphasize the complex and often inconsistent or unpredictable relationship between WASH and hookworm. Specifically, we found that while preventive chemotherapy appeared to dramatically reduce hookworm infection, WASH was associated with infection intensity.

Preventive chemotherapy plays a critical role in breaking transmission of soil-transmitted helminths but it is likely that sustainable control of soil-transmitted helminths will require environmental improvements such as access to water for hygiene and hygienic sanitation, access to and use of a clean toilet facility, and handwashing with soap at key times (WASH). Here, we report on school-, home- and community-level WASH and the relationship of these characteristics with the prevalence and intensity of hookworm infection, one of the most prevalent soil-transmitted helminths, observed in the context of preventive chemotherapy among Togolese school children. In this large, country-wide assessment, few WASH conditions were found to be significant predictors of the presence or absence of hookworms in an individual, however, intensity of infection was associated with several WASH characteristics. Our analysis emphasizes the complex and often unpredictable role of WASH characteristics on hookworm, particularly relevant for Togolese and other international policy makers aiming to understand the interaction between WASH, preventive chemotherapy and hookworm. Further research taking into account not only WASH conditions but also use of WASH resources and practices would further strengthen our understanding of the interaction between WASH and deworming treatment as effective hookworm control strategies.

Design, Intervention Fidelity, and Behavioral Outcomes of a School-Based Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene Cluster-Randomized Trial in Laos

Evidence of the impact of water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) in schools (WinS) interventions on pupil absence and health is mixed. Few WinS evaluations rigorously report on output and outcome measures that allow for comparisons of effectiveness between interventions to be made, or for an understanding of why programs succeed. The Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene for Health and Education in Laotian Primary Schools (WASH HELPS) study was a randomized controlled trial designed to measure the impact of the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) Laos WinS project on child health and education. We also measured the sustainability of intervention outputs and outcomes, and analyzed the effectiveness of group hygiene activities on behavior change and habit formation. Here, we present the design and intermediate results from this study. We found the WinS project improved the WASH environment in intervention schools; 87.8% of schools received the intervention per design. School-level adherence to outputs was lower; on average, schools met 61.4% of adherence-related criteria. The WinS project produced positive changes in pupils' school WASH behaviors, specifically increasing toilet use and daily group handwashing. Daily group hygiene activities are effective strategies to improve school WASH behaviors, but a complementary strategy needs to be concurrently promoted for effective and sustained individual handwashing practice at critical times.

Effect of an integrated intervention package of preventive chemotherapy, community-led total sanitation and health education on the prevalence of helminth and intestinal protozoa infections in Côte d'Ivoire

Background

Preventive chemotherapy with donated anthelminthic drugs is the cornerstone for the control of helminthiases. However, reinfection can occur rapidly in the absence of clean water and sanitation coupled with unhygienic behaviour. The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of an integrated package of interventions, consisting of preventive chemotherapy, community-led total sanitation (CLTS) and health education, on the prevalence of helminth and intestinal protozoa infections and on participants’ knowledge, attitude, practice and beliefs (KAPB) towards these diseases including water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH).

Methods

A cross-sectional survey was carried out in nine communities of south-central Côte d’Ivoire to assess people’s infection with helminths and intestinal protozoa and KAPB. Subsequently, interventions were targeted to five communities, while the remaining communities served as control. The intervention encouraged latrine construction and an evaluation was done 6–7 months later to determine open defecation status of the respective communities. Anthelminthic treatment was provided to all community members. A follow-up cross-sectional survey was conducted approximately one year later, using the same procedures.

Results

Overall, 810 people had complete baseline and follow-up data and were given anthelminthic treatment. The baseline prevalence of hookworm, Schistosoma haematobium, Trichuris trichiura, Schistosoma mansoni and Ascaris lumbricoides was 31.1%, 7.0%, 2.0%, 1.0% and 0.3%, respectively. Four of the five intervention communities were classified open-defecation free. For hookworm infection, we observed higher negative changes in terms of proportion of decrease (-0.10; 95% confidence interval (CI): - 0.16, -0.04) and higher egg reduction rate (64.9 vs 15.2%) when comparing intervention with control communities. For intestinal protozoa, prevalence reduction was higher in intervention compared to control communities (8.2 vs 2.6%) and WASH indicators and intervention outcomes associated with lower odds for infection at follow-up. The intervention significantly impacted on reported latrine use (before: 15.5%, after: 94.6%), open defecation in the community surroundings (before: 75.0%, after: 16.7%) and awareness for environmental contamination through open defecation (before: 20.4%, after: 52.2%).

Conclusions

An integrated package of interventions consisting of preventive chemotherapy, health education and CLTS reduces the prevalence of helminth and intestinal protozoa infection. Additional studies in other social-ecological settings are warranted to confirm our findings.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13071-018-2642-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The Role of Adherence on the Impact of a School-Based Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene Intervention in Mali

AbstractStudies assessing the impacts of school-based water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) interventions have revealed inconsistent improvements in pupils' health and educational outcomes. This may be in part due to suboptimal project fidelity or adherence. As part of a matched-control trial of a comprehensive school-based WASH project in Mali, we measured the degree to which schools met four prespecified WASH targets, comprised of 15 criteria, 0-3 years after program implementation. We compared achievement of the targets and criteria between beneficiary and matched control schools, and compared achievement within beneficiary schools at baseline and at follow-up visits. We assessed the "as-treated" associations between WASH target achievement and pupil diarrhea, respiratory symptoms, and absence. Between 44% and 81% of beneficiary schools achieved each target. Although adherence was inconsistent across schools, beneficiary schools, on average, met more WASH targets than matched control schools, and beneficiary schools also met more WASH targets at follow-up than at baseline. Very few of the targets were individually associated with health and absenteeism outcomes. Increasing achievement of multiple WASH targets together was associated with a lower odds of pupils having diarrhea (P trend < 0.01) and having respiratory symptoms (P trend < 0.01), but was not associated with roll-call absence (P trend = 0.14) or pupil-reported absence (P trend = 0.41). These results indicate that a comprehensive WASH intervention and a focus on increasing adherence may help maximize the health effects of school WASH programs, but that WASH alone might not be sufficient to decrease pupils' absenteeism.