No abstract

Background Internally displaced persons fleeing their homes due to conflict and drought are particularly at risk of morbidity and mortality from diarrhoeal diseases. Regular handwashing with soap (HWWS) could substantially reduce the risk of these infections, but the behaviour is challenging to practice while living in resource-poor, informal settlements. To mitigate these challenges, humanitarian aid organisations distribute hygiene kits, including soap and handwashing infrastructure. Our study aimed to assess the effect of modified hygiene kits on handwashing behaviours among internally displaced persons in Moyale, Ethiopia. Methods The pilot study evaluated three interventions: providing liquid soap; scented soap bar; and the inclusion of a mirror in addition to the standard hygiene kit. The hygiene kits were distributed to four study arms. Three of the arms received one of the interventions in addition to the standard hygiene kit. Three to six weeks after distribution the change in behaviour and perceptions of the interventions were assessed through structured observations, surveys and focus group discussions. Results HWWS was rare at critical times for all study arms. In the liquid soap arm, HWWS was observed for only 20% of critical times. This result was not indicated significantly different from the control arm which had a prevalence of 17% (p-value = 0.348). In the mirror and scented soap bar intervention arms, HWWS prevalence was 11 and 10%, respectively. This was indicated to be significantly different from the control arm. Participants in the focus group discussions indicated that liquid soap, scented soap bar and the mirror made handwashing more desirable. In contrast, participants did not consider the soap bar normally distributed in hygiene kits as nice to use. Conclusion We found no evidence of an increased prevalence of handwashing with soap following distribution of the three modified hygiene kits. However, our study indicates the value in better understanding hygiene product preferences as this may contribute to increased acceptability and use among crisis-affected populations. The challenges of doing research in a conflict-affected region had considerable implications on this study’s design and implementation. Trial registration The trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov 6 September 2019 (reg no: NCT04078633).

Humanitarian crises such as disease outbreaks, conflict and displacement and natural disasters affect millions of people primarily in low- and middle-income countries. Here, they often reside in areas with poor environmental health conditions leading to an increased burden of infectious diseases such as diarrheal and respiratory infections. Water, sanitation, and hygiene behaviours are critical to prevent such infections and deaths. A scoping review was conducted to map out what is known about the association between three mental health issues and people’s perceived and actual ability to practice hygiene-related behaviours, particularly handwashing, in humanitarian and pandemic crises. Published and grey literature was identified through database searches, humanitarian-relevant portals, and consultations with key stakeholders in the humanitarian sector. 25 publications were included, 21 were peer-reviewed published articles and four were grey literature publications. Most of the studies were conducted in China (n=12) and most were conducted in a pandemic outbreak setting (n=20). Six studies found a positive correlation between handwashing and anxiety where participants with higher rates of anxiety were more likely to practice handwashing with soap. Four studies found an inverse relationship where those with higher rates of anxiety were less likely to wash their hands with soap. The review found mixed results for the association between handwashing and depression, with four of the seven studies reporting those with higher rates of depression were less likely to wash their hands, while the remaining studies found that higher depressions scores resulted in more handwashing. Mixed results were also found between post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and handwashing. Two studies found that lower scores of PTSD were associated with better hygiene practices, including handwashing with soap. The contradictory patterns suggest that researchers and practitioners need to explore this association further, in a wider range of crises, and need to standardize tools to do so.

Background: At the onset of the pandemic in Kenya, a multisector taskforce was set up to coordinate the COVID-19 response. The taskforce identified 7500 COVID-19 transmissions ‘hotspots’ in public spaces across Kenya, coordinated partners and implemented hand hygiene interventions. To complement these efforts, the National Business Compact Coalition procured and distributed 5311 handwashing stations (HWSs); conducted behavior change communications; and provided technical support on operation, maintenance and monitoring to HWSs caretakers across the country. In view of these interventions, it was paramount to assess the functionality, usability and accessibility of the public HWSs in order to improve the operation and maintenance and inform strategies for future roll-out of HWSs in public settings. Methods: This was a mixed-methods observational study conducted in five randomly selected counties in Kenya: Nairobi, Kwale, Embu, Mombasa and Homabay. Quantitative data were collected through spot checks of randomly selected HWSs in these counties, caretaker surveys, user observations and user exit interviews. Qualitative data were collected through key informant interviews, focus group discussions and in-depth interviews. Quantitative data were analyzed using Chi-square tests, or where applicable, Fisher’s exact tests to assess the accessibility, usability and functionality of the HWSs. Qualitative data were analysed thematically and used to support the quantitative findings. Results: A total of 430 HWSs were targeted for this study and 316 (73%) were located and surveyed. The remainder were largely absent because the caretakers were absent or had relocated, or had been stolen, in storage or in the caretakers’ home. Of the located handwashing facilities, 83.9% were functional (meaning the facility had water in it, soap available for use and a functioning tap). A significantly higher proportion of functional handwashing stations were managed by a paid caretaker (95.9%) compared to an unpaid caretaker (78.4%) (P=0.001). Only 35% of HWSs were accessible for a person using a wheelchair, 76.9 accessible for child under 12 years, and 76.3% accessible for older persons, 81.6% of users reported HWSs to be of comfortable height, and about half (49.1%) of the HWSs were set up on uneven and/or muddy ground. Conclusion: This study has demonstrated distribution of public handwashing facilities can have a limited lifespan. HWSs future distributions should prioritise long-term plans for follow-up with caretakers responsible for operation and maintenance of public handwashing stations to provide support and to sustain accountability. It is also imperative to make HWSs accessible for wheelchair users and those less able to walk. Finally, design considerations should be made for comfortable height, placement in stable surfaces, soap placement and drainage of wastewater.

Background Internally displaced persons (IDPs) forced to flee from their homes due to conflict and drought are at particular risk of morbidity and mortality due to diarrhoeal diseases. Regular handwashing with soap could substantially reduce the risk of these infections, but the behaviour is challenging to practice routinely while living in resource-poor, informal settlements. To mitigate these challenges, humanitarian aid organisations distribute hygiene kits including soap and handwashing infrastructure. Our study aimed to assess the effect of improved kits on handwashing behaviours among IDPs in Moyale, Ethiopia. Methods The pilot study evaluated three interventions separately; liquid soap, a good quality scented bar soap and a mirror as additions to a regular hygiene kit. The kit was distributed to all study groups, with 3 of the study groups receiving one of the interventions each. Three to six weeks after distribution, behaviour change was assessed through structured observations, surveys and focus group discussions. Results Handwashing with soap was rare at key times both in all study groups. In the group that received liquid soap, handwashing with soap was seen at 20% of key times. In the control arm this was 17%, while in the two other intervention arms prevalence was <11%. Both quantitative and qualitative data collection indicated that liquid soap encourages handwashing with soap at key times. The good quality scented bar soap and mirror were not found to have an observed effect on behaviour but were viewed as desirable by participants who also reported that the standard bar soap distributed in hygiene kits was not nice to use. Conclusion This study was to our knowledge the first randomised intervention study on handwashing among IDPs living in a non-camp setting. The study shows that improved kits have potential to make handwashing more desirable and easier to practice, and further research including formative assessments prior to the design of hygiene kits should be conducted to ensure maximal uptake. The challenges of doing research in conflict-affected regions had considerable implications on the design and implementation of this study.Trial registration The trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov 6 September 2019 (reg no: NCT04078633)

Background Internally displaced persons (IDPs) forced to flee from their homes due to conflict and drought are at particular risk of morbidity and mortality due to diarrhoeal diseases. Regular handwashing with soap could substantially reduce the risk of these infections, but the behaviour is challenging to practice while living in resource-poor, informal settlements. To mitigate these challenges, humanitarian aid organisations distribute hygiene kits including soap and handwashing infrastructure. Our study aimed to assess the effect of modified hygiene kits on handwashing behaviours among IDPs in Moyale, Ethiopia. Methods The pilot study evaluated three interventions separately; liquid soap, a ‘good quality’ scented bar soap and a mirror as modifications to a standard hygiene kit. The hygiene kit was distributed to four study arms, with three of the arms receiving one of the interventions in addition. Three to six weeks after distribution, behaviour change and perceptions of the interventions was assessed through structured observations, surveys and focus group discussions. Results At follow-up, handwashing with soap was rare at key times in all study arms. In the arm that received liquid soap, handwashing with soap was seen at 20% of key times but this was not indicated significantly different to the control arm were a prevalence of 17% (p-value=0.348). In the two other intervention arms prevalence was <11%. Participants in FGDs indicated that the liquid soap, scented bar soap and the mirror made handwashing more desirable. In contrast the standard bar soap distributed in hygiene kits was not viewed as being nice to use. Conclusion This study did not identify any effect of the modified kits on handwashing behaviour. However, it did indicate that there is value in better understanding hygiene product preferences as this may contribute to increased acceptability and use among crisis-affected populations. The challenges of doing research in conflict-affected regions had considerable implications on the design and implementation of this study.Trial registration The trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov 6 September 2019 (reg no: NCT04078633)