Background Farmers in developing countries, including Ethiopia, are exposed to agricultural pesticides, including pesticides that are restricted or banned in developed countries. There is little information available on pesticide use safety practices and associated factors among Ethiopian farmers, particularly in the study area. Objective To assess pesticide use safety practices and associated factors among farmers in Fogera district wetland area, Amhara region, Northwest Ethiopia. Methods A community-based cross-sectional study design that employs quantitative and qualitative methods was used from August 25 to September 30, 2021. Four hundred thirty participants were included by using a stratified random sampling technique. Pre-tested interview questionnaires, observational checklists, and key informant and in-depth interview guides were used to collect data. The quantitative data were collected by face-to-face interviews of farmers, whereas the qualitative data were collected by in-depth interviews of selected farmers and key informant interviews of responsible stalk holders. The data were entered into Epi data version 4.6 and analyzed using SPSS version 21. Bi-variable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with the dependent variable. A p-value of less than 0.05 was used as a cut-off point to declare a statistically significant association between factors and outcome variables. The odds ratio and 95% CI were calculated to describe the strength of the association between factors and outcome variables. The qualitative study included 35 respondents from various backgrounds and levels of expertise, which were analyzed using thematic analysis by open-code 4.03 version software. Result The proportion of good pesticide use safety practices in the study area was 24.4% (95% CI: 21.4%–29.3%). Educational status (adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 3.19, 95% CI: 1.44–6.71), experience of pesticide spraying (AOR: 6.85. 95% CI: 2.426–9.35), knowledge of pesticide usage (AOR: 3.40, 95% CI: 1.459–7.855), access to safety materials (AOR: 2.06, 95% CI: 1.198–3.536), and ever having received training (AOR: 4.93, 95% CI: 2.88–8.59) were factors associated with good safety practice in pesticide use. Qualitatively, limited material access, lack of government attention, insufficient training opportunities, absence of media coverage, weak enforcement of laws, and limited guideline access barred good safety practices for pesticide use. Conclusion The study revealed that good safety practices were low in the study area. Being educated, having experience with pesticide spraying, having good knowledge of pesticide usage, having access to safety materials, and having received pesticide use training all increased the likelihood of good pesticide use practice. Insufficient training opportunities and material access, weak law enforcement, limited access to guidelines, and a shortage of media coverage were challenges identified qualitatively.

Worldwide, 663 million people do not have access to improved drinking water supplies and 2.5 billion people lack access to improved sanitation including one billion who practice open defecation. Eighty-eight percent of deaths from diarrheal diseases are attributable to unsafe water, inadequate sanitation, and insufficient hygiene practices. So this study is aimed at assessing water handling and sanitation practice among rural communities of Farta woreda, North West Ethiopia. A community based cross-sectional study was conducted in Farta Woreda in March 2014. A total of 834 households were proportionally allocated to 10 kebeles of the Woreda and selected by systematic random sampling technique. Data was collected using a pretested structured questionnaire. Descriptive analysis was performed to obtain the frequency distribution of the variables. The majority of respondents used unprotected spring 313 (37.5%) followed by protected spring 206 (24.7%) for all domestic use. Most respondents 382 (92.5%) had covered their stored water and practiced pouring method to withdraw water from the stored container. Majority 738 (88.5%) of households had access to water within a time of 30 minutes or less. House hold water treatment was not common in the study area, only 23 (2.8%) households practiced. About four hundred seventy eight (57.3%) households had latrine facility, of which 263 (55%) was open pit latrine. Of those households having latrine only 102 (21.3%) households had hand washing facility. This study revealed that most of the respondents had poor water handling and sanitation practice. Thus, it underscores that there should be great attention.

Access to safe water is a universal need. However, many of the world's population lack access to adequate and safe water. Consumption of contaminated water with viruses, bacteria and parasites causes health risk to the public and the situation is serious in rural areas. So this study is aimed at assessing the bacteriological quality of drinking water at source and point of use among rural Communities of Farta Woreda, North Western, Ethiopia. A descriptive cross sectional study was conducted in March 2014 in 41 rural Kebeles of Farta Woreda. A total of 120 water samples were obtained from protected water sources and household water storage containers and tested for Escherichia coli by using membrane filter methods. The contaminant risk of water sources and household storage containers were assessed by sanitary inspection checklist of World health Organization. Descriptive statistics (proportion and percentage) were used to count the E. coli load and the results were interpreted using World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines for drinking water quality. All household water storage containers and majority 22(91.7%) of the protected wells and 5(83.3%) springs in the study area were not in compliance with WHO recommended values (0 CFU/100 ml of drinking water) for drinking water. Majority 10(41.7%) of protected well, 5(83.3%) protected spring and 42(46.7%) household storage containers had high sanitary risk score for E. coli. The water sources and also household water storage containers were heavily contaminated with E. coli. Source protection strategies, awareness creation on safe water handling practices as well as monitoring are necessary to enhance good drinking water quality.

Background Although all people have the right to access basic sanitation services, people with disabilities often face additional barriers to accessing the service compared to people without disabilities. Over the last few years, with the focus of the sustainable development goals on universal access to water supply, sanitation, and hygiene facilities, awareness of the need for programs to reach and benefit everyone has been growing. But the current level of access to latrines is not known. Objective To determine latrine access and identify factors associated with it among people with physically disability in Kombolcha town, 2020. Methods A community-based mixed cross-sectional study was conducted among physically disabled people in Kombolcha town in April 2020. Quantitative data was collected from 374 randomly selected study participants using structured interviewer-administered questioners. The key informant and in-depth interviews were conducted with purposely selected individuals.The bivariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted. Thematic analysis was used for qualitative data Results Latrine access among people with a physical disability was found to be (22%), 95% CI (17.7–26.5). membershipto disability association (AOR = 2.162, 95% CI (1.231–3.799)),wealth status of study participants. (AOR = 4.169, 95% CI (1.96–8.864)) stigma and discrimination to get latrine in the last 12 months(AOR = 0.212, 95% CI (0.116–0.388)) and study participant’s knowledge to construct accessible latrine (AOR = 4.389, 95% CI (2.446–7.87)) werepredictor variables of latrine accessibility. Shared/publiclatrine, stigma and discrimination, poor wealth status,lack of own house, and lack of information provided regarding latrine accessibility supplementary barriersfor inaccessible latrinefrom In-depth and key informant interviews. Conclusion Latrine access among people with a physical disability was found to be very low. Poor knowledge of accessible latrine construction, poor wealth status, stigma and discrimination, and not beinga member of a disability association increased the risk of latrine inaccessibility.