Table 1. Key outcome indicators for WASH behavioral themes and constituent practices of interest of the Andilaye intervention at endline.
| Indicators | Intervention | Control | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sanitation (S) | Total N | % | Total N | % | PR (95% CI) a | PD (95% CI) b |
| S1: Construct a long-lasting latrine that is comfortable and hygienic | ||||||
| • Households with access to at least one household latrine | 743 | 61.2 | 729 | 62.0 | 0.99 (0.82, 1.21) | 0.00 (-0.13, 0.12) |
| • Households with access to an improved household latrine c | 741 | 34.6 | 726 | 30.6 | 1.13 (0.81, 1.59) | 0.41 (-0.07, 0.15) |
| • Households with access to a fully constructed household latrine | 742 | 33.0 | 729 | 28.7 | 1.15 (0.86, 1.54) | 0.04 (-0.46, 0.13) |
| S2: Repair your latrine whenever it is damaged | ||||||
| • Facility observed to require obvious repair | 455 | 70.1 | 451 | 80.5 | 0.88 (0.78, 0.99) | -0.10 (-0.19, -0.01) |
| S3: Upgrade your latrine so it becomes more long-lasting, comfortable, and hygienic | ||||||
| • Household has added or improved anything on the latrine since its original construction | 453 | 17.2 | 446 | 15.7 | 1.08 (0.71, 1.65) | 0.01 (-0.06, 0.08) |
| • Households with latrine with smooth and cleanable slab/floor | 743 | 16.3 | 728 | 13.3 | 1.19 (0.70, 2.03) | 0.03 (-0.05, 0.11) |
| • Presence of drop hole cover in the latrine | 455 | 18.2 | 451 | 10.0 | 1.77 (1.19, 2.63) | 0.08 (0.02, 0.14) |
| S4: Close your pit when it becomes full and reconstruct a new latrine | ||||||
| • Is the pit that is in use full or close to being full | 454 | 11.7 | 451 | 12.6 | 0.92 (0.57, 1.49) | -0.01 (-0.68, 0.05) |
| S5: All household members use a latrine every time they defecate | ||||||
| • Respondent always exclusively used a latrine for defecation during last 7 days | 743 | 53.2 | 729 | 54.1 | 0.99 (0.79, 1.24) | 0.00 (-0.12, 0.12) |
| • Head of household always exclusively used a latrine for defecation during last 7 days | 529 | 36.5 | 473 | 33.0 | 1.07 (0.79, 1.47) | 0.03 (-0.09, 0.15) |
| • Ages 4–17 always exclusively used a latrine for defecation during last 7 days | 1447 | 42.6 | 1385 | 35.0 | 1.15 (0.89, 1.50) | 0.06 (-0.05, 0.16) |
| S6: Immediately dispose of children’s feces into the latrine | ||||||
| • Child feces were safely disposed of during the last 2 days | 401 | 36.7 | 376 | 41.2 | 0.96 (0.69, 1.32) | -0.02 (-0.15, 0.11) |
| Personal hygiene (PH) | ||||||
| PH1: All household members wash their hands with water and soap or soap substitute AFTER handling animal and human feces, even children’s feces | ||||||
| • Household hand or facewashing station(s) | 743 | 98.3 | 729 | 97.7 | 1.01 (0.99, 1.02) | 0.01 (-0.01, 0.02) |
| • The last time the respondent defecated, s/he cleaned hands with water and soap, substitute | 738 | 51.9 | 725 | 46.1 | 1.13 (0.94, 1.35) | 0.06 (-0.03, 0.15) |
| • The last time the index child defecated, s/he cleaned hands with water and soap, substitute | 713 | 43.9 | 697 | 39.6 | 1.12 (0.92, 1.35) | 0.05 (-0.04, 0.13) |
| PH2: All household members wash their hands with water and soap or soap substitute BEFORE handling food | ||||||
| • The last time the respondent prepared food, s/he cleaned hands with water and soap, substitute before beginning food preparations | 700 | 53.6 | 703 | 48.5 | 1.11 (0.95, 1.29) | 0.05 (-0.03, 0.13) |
| PH3: All household members wash their faces with water whenever they are dirty and use soap when it is available | ||||||
| • Ocular discharge present among children aged 1–9 years | 822 | 26.9 | 874 | 30.4 | 0.88 (0.68, 1.15) | -0.04 (-0.11, 0.04) |
| • Wet nasal discharge present among children aged 1–9 years | 822 | 37.0 | 874 | 39.4 | 0.94 (0.78, 1.13) | -0.02 (-0.09, 0.05) |
| • Dry nasal discharge present among children aged 1–9 years | 822 | 42.7 | 874 | 45.2 | 0.97 (0.81, 1.16) | -0.02 (-0.10, 0.06) |
| • Dirt/dust/other debris present among children aged 1–9 years | 822 | 50.5 | 874 | 49.5 | 1.03 (0.89, 1.20) | 0.02 (-0.06, 0.09) |
| Household Environmental Sanitation (HES) | ||||||
| HES1: Keep all animals separated from the house | ||||||
| • Observed animal feces present in the compound | 743 | 82.2 | 729 | 82.4 | 1.01 (0.92, 1.11) | 0.01 (-0.07, 0.08) |
| HES2: Keep the household compound clean by disposing of all animal feces and other waste on a DAILY basis | ||||||
| • Animal feces/waste not left out in open in compound | 743 | 56.4 | 729 | 51.2 | 1.10 (0.95, 1.28) | 0.05 (-0.03, 0.13) |
| • Solid waste was not observed to have been left out in the open | 743 | 34.6 | 729 | 27.6 | 1.26 (0.93, 1.69) | 0.07 (-0.02, 0.17) |
Notes.
a We used log-linear binomial regression models to compare the prevalence of the outcomes between the intervention and control arms. Models accounted the stratified design by including woreda indicator variables [58], and accounted for clustering within kebeles by using generalized estimating equations with robust standard errors.
b Prevalence differences (PD) were calculated using post-estimation commands to estimate the average marginal effects.
c “Improved” was defined based on the WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme (JMP) for Water Supply and Sanitation definition.