Are current approaches for measuring access to clean water and sanitation inclusive of people with disabilities? Comparison of individual- and household-level access between people with and without disabilities in the Tanahun district of Nepal


Autoři: Lena Morgon Banks aff001;  Sian White aff002;  Adam Biran aff002;  Jane Wilbur aff001;  Shailes Neupane aff003;  Saurav Neupane aff003;  Aditi Sharma aff004;  Hannah Kuper aff001
Působiště autorů: International Centre for Evidence in Disability, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom aff001;  Environmental Health Group, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom aff002;  Valley Research Group, Kathmandu, Nepal aff003;  Pennsylvania State University, State College, Pennsylvania, United States of America aff004
Vyšlo v časopise: PLoS ONE 14(10)
Kategorie: Research Article
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0223557

Souhrn

Background

The critical importance of safe and affordable access to water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) is highlighted in Goal 6 of the Sustainable Development Goals, which seeks to achieve universal and equitable access for all by 2030. However, people with disabilities–who comprise 15% of the global population–frequently face difficulties meeting their WASH needs. Unmet WASH needs amongst people with disabilities may not be captured through current approaches to tracking progress towards Goal 6, which focus on household- rather than individual-level access.

Objective

To evaluate access to safe water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH), at the individual- and household-level, amongst people with disabilities in the Tanahun district of Nepal.

Methods

A population-based survey of disability was conducted from August-October 2016 to evaluate access to improved water and sanitation facilities between households with members with disabilities (n = 198) and those without (n = 1,265) in the Tanahun district of Nepal. A nested case-control then compared individual-level access between cases aged 15 and above with disabilities (n = 192) and age-sex-location matched controls without disabilities (n = 189), using the newly developed 21-item “Quality of WASH Access” questionnaire. Multivariate regression was used to compare household- and individual-level indicators between people and households with and without disabilities. In-depth interviews with 18 people with disabilities and their caregivers was conducted to assess the acceptability and appropriateness of the “Quality of WASH Access” questionnaire.

Findings

There were no significant differences between households with and without members with disabilities in access to an improved sanitation facility or water source. However, at the individual-level, people with disabilities experienced significantly greater difficulties accessing water, sanitation and hygiene compared to people without disabilities (p<0.001 for all three scores). Amongst people with disabilities, water difficulty scores were associated with having a physical impairment and greater disability severity; sanitation difficulty scores were associated with lower socioeconomic status and physical or self-care limitations; and hygiene difficulty scores were positively associated with self-care limitations and lower socioeconomic status, and inversely associated with hearing impairments. Qualitative research found the “Quality of WASH Access” questionnaire was well understood by participants and captured many of the challenges they faced. Additional challenges not covered by the tool included: (1) time spent on WASH, (2) consistency of access, (3) sufficiency of access, and (4) dignity of access.

Conclusion

People with disabilities face substantial challenges to meeting their WASH needs, particularly in using services autonomously, consistently, hygienically, with dignity and privacy, and without pain or fear of abuse. These challenges are not captured through household-level data, and so individual-level WASH access are needed to monitor progress towards universal WASH access. The Quality of WASH Access questionnaire may provide a useful data collection tool.

Klíčová slova:

Disabilities – Hygiene – Children – Nepal – Qualitative studies – Sanitation – Water resources – Case-control studies


Zdroje

1. World Health Organization, WHO/UNICEF Joint Water Supply SMP. Progress on sanitation and drinking water: 2015 update and MDG assessment: World Health Organization; 2015.

2. Prüss‐Ustün A, Bartram J, Clasen T, Colford JM, Cumming O, Curtis V, et al. Burden of disease from inadequate water, sanitation and hygiene in low‐and middle‐income settings: a retrospective analysis of data from 145 countries. Tropical Medicine & International Health. 2014;19(8):894–905.

3. Bartram J, Cairncross S. Hygiene, sanitation, and water: forgotten foundations of health. PLoS medicine. 2010;7(11):e1000367. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000367 21085694

4. Jasper C, Le T-T, Bartram J. Water and sanitation in schools: a systematic review of the health and educational outcomes. International journal of environmental research and public health. 2012;9(8):2772–87. doi: 10.3390/ijerph9082772 23066396

5. Ejemot-Nwadiaro RI, Ehiri JE, Arikpo D, Meremikwu MM, Critchley JA. Hand washing promotion for preventing diarrhoea. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2015;(9):Cd004265. Epub 2015/09/09. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004265.pub3 26346329; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4563982.

6. United Nations General Assembly. The human right to water and sanitation 2010.

7. United Nations. Goal 6: Ensure access to water and sanitation for all 2015 [cited 2018 June 21]. Available from: https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/water-and-sanitation/.

8. White S, Kuper H, Itimu-Phiri A, Holm R, Biran A. A qualitative study of barriers to accessing water, sanitation and hygiene for disabled people in Malawi. PloS one. 2016;11(5):e0155043. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0155043 27171520

9. Kuper H, Mactaggart I, White S, Dionicio C, Cañas R, Naber J, et al. Exploring the links between water, sanitation and hygiene and disability; Results from a case-control study in Guatemala. PloS one. 2018;13(6):e0197360. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0197360 29856770

10. Mactaggart I, Schmidt W-P, Bostoen K, Chunga J, Danquah L, Halder AK, et al. Access to water and sanitation among people with disabilities: results from cross-sectional surveys in Bangladesh, Cameroon, India and Malawi. BMJ open. 2018;8(6):e020077. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-020077 29866723

11. Groce N, Bailey N, Lang R, Trani J-F, Kett M. Water and sanitation issues for persons with disabilities in low-and middle-income countries: a literature review and discussion of implications for global health and international development. Journal of Water and Health. 2011;9(4):617–27. doi: 10.2166/wh.2011.198 22048421

12. World Health Organization & World Bank. World report on disability: World Health Organization; 2011.

13. United Nations. Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development New York, US: United Nations, 2015.

14. Desai G, Wilbur J, Smith K, Jensen JN, Lenker J, Ram P. Laddering up? A research framework in sanitation for people with disabilities in low-income settings. Waterlines. 2017;36(4):305–16.

15. Biran A, Danquah L, Chunga J, Schmidt W-P, Holm R, Itimu-Phiri A, et al. A Cluster-Randomized Trial to Evaluate the Impact of an Inclusive, Community-Led Total Sanitation Intervention on Sanitation Access for People with Disabilities in Malawi. 2018.

16. He W-J, Lai Y-S, Karmacharya BM, Dai B-F, Hao Y-T, Xu DR. Geographical heterogeneity and inequality of access to improved drinking water supply and sanitation in Nepal. International journal for equity in health. 2018;17(1):40. doi: 10.1186/s12939-018-0754-8 29609601

17. Kuper H, Polack S, Limburg H. Rapid assessment of avoidable blindness. Community Eye Health. 2006;19(60):68. 17515970

18. Marella M, Busija L, Islam FMA, Devine A, Fotis K, Baker SM, et al. Field-testing of the rapid assessment of disability questionnaire. BMC Public Health. 2014;14(1):900.

19. Marella M, Devine A, Armecin GF, Zayas J, Marco MJ, Vaughan C. Rapid assessment of disability in the Philippines: understanding prevalence, well-being, and access to the community for people with disabilities to inform the W-DARE project. Population health metrics. 2016;14(1):26.

20. Washington Group, UNICEF. Child Functioning Question Sets 2018. Available from: http://www.washingtongroup-disability.com/washington-group-question-sets/child-disability/.

21. Washington Group on Disability Statistics. Washington Group—Extended Question Set on Functioning (WG ES-F) 2011. Available from: http://www.washingtongroup-disability.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/WG_Extended_Question_Set_on_Functioning.pdf.

22. Ministry of Health and Population [Nepal], New ERA, ICF International Inc. Nepal Demographic and Health Survey 2011. In: Population MoHa, editor. Kathmandu, Nepal2012.

23. Vyas S, Kumaranayake L. Constructing socio-economic status indices: how to use principal components analysis. Health policy and planning. 2006;21(6):459–68. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czl029 17030551

24. Boyatzis RE. Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development: sage; 1998.

25. Banks LM, Kuper H, Polack S. Poverty and disability in low-and middle-income countries: A systematic review. PloS one. 2017;12(12):e0189996. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0189996 29267388

26. Eide A, Neupane S, Hem KG. Living conditions among people with disability in Nepal. SINTEF, 2016.

27. Ministry of Health N, New ERA, Program D. Nepal Demographic Health Survey 2016. Kathmandu, Nepal Ministry of Health, Nepal, 2017.

28. Bright T, Kuper H. A Systematic Review of Access to General Healthcare Services for People with Disabilities in Low and Middle Income Countries. International journal of environmental research and public health. 2018;15(9):1879.

29. Shakespeare T, Bright T, Kuper H. Access to health for persons with disabilities. Geneva: United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, 2018.

30. Mactaggart I, Kuper H, Murthy G, Sagar J, Oye J, Polack S. Assessing health and rehabilitation needs of people with disabilities in Cameroon and India. Disability and rehabilitation. 2016;38(18):1757–64. doi: 10.3109/09638288.2015.1107765 26680511

31. World Health Organization, UNICEF. JMP Methodology: 2017 Update & SDG Baselines. Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply, 2018.

32. WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply SaH. Progress on drinking water, sanitation and hygiene: 2017 update and SDG baselines. Geneva: World Health Organization and UNICEF, 2017.

33. Jones H, Wilbur J. Compendium of accessible WASH technologies: WaterAid; 2014.

34. Wilbur J, Jones H, Gosling L, Groce N, Challenger E. Undoing inequity: inclusive water, sanitation and hygiene programmes that deliver for all in Uganda and Zambia. 36th WEDC Internatioanl Conference; Nakuru, Kenay2013.

35. Wilbur J, Jones H. Disability: making CLTS fully inclusive. 2014.


Článek vyšel v časopise

PLOS One


2019 Číslo 10

Nejčtenější v tomto čísle

Tomuto tématu se dále věnují…


Kurzy

Zvyšte si kvalifikaci online z pohodlí domova

Léčba bolesti v ordinaci praktického lékaře
nový kurz
Autoři: MUDr. PhDr. Zdeňka Nováková, Ph.D.

Revmatoidní artritida: včas a k cíli
Autoři: MUDr. Heřman Mann

Jistoty a nástrahy antikoagulační léčby aneb kardiolog - neurolog - farmakolog - nefrolog - právník diskutují
Autoři: doc. MUDr. Štěpán Havránek, Ph.D., prof. MUDr. Roman Herzig, Ph.D., doc. MUDr. Karel Urbánek, Ph.D., prim. MUDr. Jan Vachek, MUDr. et Mgr. Jolana Těšínová, Ph.D.

Léčba akutní pooperační bolesti
Autoři: doc. MUDr. Jiří Málek, CSc.

Nové antipsychotikum kariprazin v léčbě schizofrenie
Autoři: prof. MUDr. Cyril Höschl, DrSc., FRCPsych.

Všechny kurzy
Kurzy Doporučená témata Časopisy
Přihlášení
Zapomenuté heslo

Nemáte účet?  Registrujte se

Zapomenuté heslo

Zadejte e-mailovou adresu se kterou jste vytvářel(a) účet, budou Vám na ni zaslány informace k nastavení nového hesla.

Přihlášení

Nemáte účet?  Registrujte se