Sanitation facilities and hygiene practices in a semi-urban community in Rivers State, south-south Nigeria
Keywords:
Sanitation facility, hygiene practices, Semi- Urban community, NigeriaAbstract
Background: Water and sanitation projects are synergistic in producing health effects; while there has been massive investment in water projects as part of the effort to achieve the Millennium Development Goal on access to water and sanitation; the same cannot be said for sanitation projects. This study examined the state of sanitation facilities and hygiene behaviour in an oil rich community in the Niger delta region of Nigeria.
Method: The study was carried out in Ogbogu, a small semi-urban community in Rivers State, south-south Nigeria, using a descriptive cross-sectional study design. The data was collected using a structured interviewer-administered questionnaire, field observations and focus group discussions. The questionnaire was administered to female heads of households with under-five children; the field observations consisted of direct observations, spot checks and rating checks of sanitation facilities and hygiene behaviour of the respondents; while the focus group discussions were held with executive members of the community's women's association.
Results: Only 68% of the households in the community had access to a sanitation facility. The reasons given for not having a sanitation facility include lack of space (85.92%), and cost (12.68%). Most of the facilities were flush toilets (61.07%), and they formed 87.95% of the 83 facilities found to be in good hygienic condition. Of the respondents with sanitation facility, 28.86% would not allow young children to use the facility. Only 21.36% of the respondents routinely disposed the stool of their children into the sanitation facility; human faeces were consequently found around the house of 40% of the respondents. About 22% of the respondents were found to have the appropriate hand washing behaviour; while the two week period prevalence of diarrhea amongst children less than 36 weeks was 14.09%.
Conclusions: The access to sanitation facility, and hand washing behaviour in the study community were poor. Hygiene education and social marketing of sanitation facilities are hereby advised
References
Simpson-Hebert M, Wood S eds. Sanitation Promotion. Geneva. World Health Organization/ Water Supply and Sanitation Collaborative Council (Working Group on Promotion of Sanitation). 1998.
Cairncross S, Carruthers I, Curtis D, Feachem R, Bradley D, Baldwin G. Evaluation for village water supply planning. The Hague: International Reference Centre for Community Water Supply and Sanitation/ John Wiley & Sons; 1991: 75.
Department for International Development (DFID). Guidance manual on water supply and sanitation programmes. London: WELL/ London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.1998.
Esrey S, Potash J, Roberts L, Shiff C. Effects of improved water supply and sanitation on ascariasis, diarrhea, drancunculiasis, hookworm infection, schistosomiasis and trachoma. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 1991; 60:609 621
World Health Organization. The World Health Report: 2005: Make Every Mother and Child Count. Geneva: World Health Organization. 2005.
UN Millenium Development Goals Available at: http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals. Accessed June 2007
Water Aid Nigeria. Water and Sanitation in Nigeria: A briefing on national policy. Water Aid Nigeria. 2008.
National Population Commission (Nigeria) and ORC Macro. Nigeria Demographic and Health Survey 2003. Calverton, Maryland. 2004: 151 166.
Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC). Water projects: Quenching the people's thirst. Available at http://www.nddc.gov.ng. assessed April, 2009.
Bentley ME, Boot MT, Gittelsohn J, Stallings RY. The use of structured observations in the study of health behaviour: occasional paper 27. The Hague. IRC/ International Water and Sanitation Center/ London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. 1994.
WHO Regional Office for the Western Pacific. Health Research Methodology: A guide for training in research methods. Second Edition. Manilla. WHO. 2001.
Billig P, Bendahmane D, Swindale A. Water and sanitation indicators measurement guide. Washington DC. Food and Nutrition Technical Assistance Project, Academy for Educational Development. 1999: 7 18.
Araoye MO. Research methodology with statistics for health and social sciences. Ilorin . Nathandex publishers. 2003. 119-120.
Admassu M, Wubshet M, Tilaye T. Sanitary survey in Gondar town. Ethiop J Health Dev. 2003; 3: 215 219.
Banda K, Sarkar R, Gopal S, Govindarajan J, Harijan BB, Jeyakumar MB et al. Water handling, sanitation and defecation practices in rural southern India: a knowledge, attitudes and practices study. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 2007; 101: 1124 -1130.
Clark R, Gundry SW. The prominence of health in donor policy for water supply and sanitation: a review. J Water Health 2004; 2: 157 169.
Bateman O, Smith S. A comparison of the health effects ofwater and sanitation in urban and rural Guatemala: WASH project field report 352. Arlington, VA. Environmental Health Project. 1991.
Fewtrell L, Kaufmann R, Kay D, Enanoria W, Haller L, Colford J. Water, sanitation, and hygiene interventions to reduce diarrhoea in less developed countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Infect Dis 2005; 5: 4252.
Curtis V, Cairncross S. Effect of washing hands on diarrhea risk in the community. Lancet infectious Disease 2003; 3: 275 281.
Boot M, Cairncross eds. Actions speaks: The study ofhygiene behaviour in water and sanitation projects. The Hague. International Reference Centre for Community Water Supply and Sanitation/ London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. 1993.
Varley RC, Tarvid J, Chao DN. A reassessment of the cost-effectiveness of water and sanitation interventions in programmes for controlling childhood diarrhoea. Bull World Health Organ 1998; 76: 617-631
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2015 The Nigerian Health Journal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The Journal is owned, published and copyrighted by the Nigerian Medical Association, River state Branch. The copyright of papers published are vested in the journal and the publisher. In line with our open access policy and the Creative Commons Attribution License policy authors are allowed to share their work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
This is an open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author.
The use of general descriptive names, trade names, trademarks, and so forth in this publication, even if not specifically identified, does not imply that these names are not protected by the relevant laws and regulations. While the advice and information in this journal are believed to be true and accurate on the date of its going to press, neither the authors, the editors, nor the publisher can accept any legal responsibility for any errors or omissions that may be made. The publisher makes no warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein.
TNHJ also supports open access archiving of articles published in the journal after three months of publication. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g, in institutional repositories or on their website) within the stated period, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access). All requests for permission for open access archiving outside this period should be sent to the editor via email to editor@tnhjph.com.
