Research methodology for developing efficient handwashing options: an example from Bangladesh.

B A Hoque, D Mahalanabis, B Pelto, M J Alam
{"title":"Research methodology for developing efficient handwashing options: an example from Bangladesh.","authors":"B A Hoque,&nbsp;D Mahalanabis,&nbsp;B Pelto,&nbsp;M J Alam","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Handwashing has been universally promoted for health interventions, but it is essential that the factors related to behaviour are understood in order to develop appropriate handwashing messages. We found the study of behaviour complex and had to combine several methods: in-depth interviewing, questionnaire; observational and bacteriological. Here we present our experiences in developing efficient handwashing options for rural Bangladesh. The components of handwashing practices after defecation of 90 rural women were studied (phase 1). During phase 1 an in-depth interview was used to design the observational and questionnaire surveys. Behaviour was observed using a semi-structured record form and the effectiveness of the acts was measured by means of bacteriological tests. A questionnaire survey was undertaken on socioeconomic and water sanitation-related variables since they influence behaviour. Then, to develop efficient handwashing options, an experimental phase (phase 2) tested the bacteriological efficacy of the components found appropriate in phase 1. The effectiveness of the handwashing practices is believed to be poor since the bacteriological counts were found to be high (faecal coliform count of the left hand 1995, and of the right hand 1318 colony forming units/hand). The practice comprised several components: use of an agent, handedness, frequency of rubbing, source and volume of rinsing water, and drying of the hands. Seventy-five per cent of the women reported that they could not afford soap. The experimental trials showed that soap, ash and soil give similar results under similar conditions of handwashing (faecal coliform counts of left hands: 195 (soap), 98 (ash), 129 (soil) and of right: 112 (soap), 54 (ash) and 89 (soil) cfu/hand). The use of multi-method techniques in the study helped to understand and develop efficient handwashing options.</p>","PeriodicalId":76688,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of tropical medicine and hygiene","volume":"98 6","pages":"469-75"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1995-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of tropical medicine and hygiene","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Handwashing has been universally promoted for health interventions, but it is essential that the factors related to behaviour are understood in order to develop appropriate handwashing messages. We found the study of behaviour complex and had to combine several methods: in-depth interviewing, questionnaire; observational and bacteriological. Here we present our experiences in developing efficient handwashing options for rural Bangladesh. The components of handwashing practices after defecation of 90 rural women were studied (phase 1). During phase 1 an in-depth interview was used to design the observational and questionnaire surveys. Behaviour was observed using a semi-structured record form and the effectiveness of the acts was measured by means of bacteriological tests. A questionnaire survey was undertaken on socioeconomic and water sanitation-related variables since they influence behaviour. Then, to develop efficient handwashing options, an experimental phase (phase 2) tested the bacteriological efficacy of the components found appropriate in phase 1. The effectiveness of the handwashing practices is believed to be poor since the bacteriological counts were found to be high (faecal coliform count of the left hand 1995, and of the right hand 1318 colony forming units/hand). The practice comprised several components: use of an agent, handedness, frequency of rubbing, source and volume of rinsing water, and drying of the hands. Seventy-five per cent of the women reported that they could not afford soap. The experimental trials showed that soap, ash and soil give similar results under similar conditions of handwashing (faecal coliform counts of left hands: 195 (soap), 98 (ash), 129 (soil) and of right: 112 (soap), 54 (ash) and 89 (soil) cfu/hand). The use of multi-method techniques in the study helped to understand and develop efficient handwashing options.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
制定有效洗手方法的研究方法:以孟加拉国为例。
洗手已被普遍推广为健康干预措施,但至关重要的是,要了解与行为有关的因素,以便制定适当的洗手信息。我们发现行为研究很复杂,必须结合几种方法:深度访谈、问卷调查;观察和细菌学。在此,我们介绍我们在为孟加拉国农村地区制定有效洗手方案方面的经验。对90名农村妇女便后洗手习惯的组成部分进行了研究(第一阶段)。在第一阶段,采用深度访谈的方式设计观察性调查和问卷调查。使用半结构化记录表观察行为,并通过细菌学测试测量行为的有效性。对社会经济和水卫生相关变量进行了问卷调查,因为它们影响行为。然后,为了开发有效的洗手选择,实验阶段(第二阶段)测试了在第一阶段中发现的适当成分的细菌学功效。由于发现细菌计数很高(左手粪便大肠菌群计数为1995,右手粪便大肠菌群计数为1318个菌落形成单位/手),因此洗手方法的有效性被认为很差。这种做法包括几个组成部分:一种药剂的使用,用手的习惯,揉搓的频率,冲洗水的来源和量,以及手的干燥。75%的女性报告说她们买不起肥皂。实验表明,在相似的洗手条件下,肥皂、灰和土壤的粪便大肠菌群计数相似(左手粪便大肠菌群计数为195(肥皂)、98(灰)、129(土壤),右手粪便大肠菌群计数为112(肥皂)、54(灰)和89(土壤)cfu/手)。在研究中使用多方法技术有助于了解和开发有效的洗手方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Changes in the anthropometric status of rural African under-fives during a decade of primary health care. Enterovirus specific IgM responses in children with acute and chronic paralytic syndrome. Soluble transferrin receptor as an index of iron status in Zaïrian children with malaria. Electron microscopy study of the mode of growth of Pseudomonas pseudomallei in vitro and in vivo. Acute aphasia complicating typhoid fever in an adult.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1