See the published version of this preprint at BMC Public Health.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
Research article
Tonny Ssekamatte
Makerere University School of Public Health
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8127-6759
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Background: Improved Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) in Healthcare facilities (HCFs) is of significant public health importance. It is associated with a reduction in the transmission of healthcare acquired infections (HAIs), increased trust and uptake of healthcare services, cost saving from infections averted, increased efficiency and improved staff morale. Despite these benefits, there is limited evidence on availability of WASH services in HCFs in the Greater Kampala Metropolitan Area (GKMA). This study assessed the availability of WASH services within HCFs in the GKMA in order to inform policy and WASH programming.
Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in 60 HCFs. Availability of WASH services in the study HCFs was assessed using a validated WASH Conditions (WASHCon) tool comprising of structured interviews, HCF observations and microbial water quality analysis. Data were analysed using Stata 14 software and R software.
Results: Overall, 84.5% (49/58) and 12.1% (7/58) of HCFs had limited and basic WASH service respectively. About 48.3% (28/58) had limited water service, 84.5% (49/58) had limited sanitation service, 50.0% (29/58) had limited environmental cleanliness service, 56.9% (33/58) had limited hand hygiene service, and 51.7% (30/58) had limited waste management service. About 94.4% of public HCFs had limited WASH service compared to only 68.2% of private not for profit facilities. More health centre IIIs, 92.5% and health centre IVs (85.7%) had limited WASH service compared to hospitals (54.5%).
Conclusions: Our findings indicate that provision of water, sanitation, hand hygiene, environmental cleanliness, and health care waste management services within HCFs are largely hindered by structural and performance limitations. In spite of these limitations, it is evident that environmental cleanliness and treatment of infectious waste can be attained with better oversight and dedicated personnel. Attaining universal WASH coverage in HCFs will require deliberate and strategic investments across the different domains.
Keywords
Water, Sanitation and Hygiene, Healthcare facilities, WASHCon, JMP, Uganda
Loading...
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Published
View the published article at BMC Public Health.
No community comments so far
Submission checks complete
On 17 Nov, 2020
Editorial decision: Accept
On 12 Nov, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Minor revision
On 02 Nov, 2020
Editor assigned
On 05 Oct, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 04 Oct, 2020
Editor invited
On 04 Oct, 2020
Version 2
Posted 19 Aug, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Minor revision
On 14 Sep, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 18 Aug, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 18 Aug, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 18 Aug, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 18 Aug, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 18 Aug, 2020
Editor assigned
On 13 Aug, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 12 Aug, 2020
Editor invited
On 12 Aug, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 29 Jun, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 26 Jun, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 18 May, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 26 Mar, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 26 Mar, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 26 Mar, 2020
Editor assigned
On 13 Mar, 2020
First submitted
On 12 Mar, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 12 Mar, 2020
Editor invited
On 12 Mar, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Learn more about our company.
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
See the published version of this preprint at BMC Public Health.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
Research article
Tonny Ssekamatte
Makerere University School of Public Health
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8127-6759
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Published
View the published article at BMC Public Health.
No community comments so far
Submission checks complete
On 17 Nov, 2020
Editorial decision: Accept
On 12 Nov, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Minor revision
On 02 Nov, 2020
Editor assigned
On 05 Oct, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 04 Oct, 2020
Editor invited
On 04 Oct, 2020
Version 2
Posted 19 Aug, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Minor revision
On 14 Sep, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 18 Aug, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 18 Aug, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 18 Aug, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 18 Aug, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 18 Aug, 2020
Editor assigned
On 13 Aug, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 12 Aug, 2020
Editor invited
On 12 Aug, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 29 Jun, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 26 Jun, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 18 May, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 26 Mar, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 26 Mar, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 26 Mar, 2020
Editor assigned
On 13 Mar, 2020
First submitted
On 12 Mar, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 12 Mar, 2020
Editor invited
On 12 Mar, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
View the published article at BMC Public Health.
Background: Improved Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) in Healthcare facilities (HCFs) is of significant public health importance. It is associated with a reduction in the transmission of healthcare acquired infections (HAIs), increased trust and uptake of healthcare services, cost saving from infections averted, increased efficiency and improved staff morale. Despite these benefits, there is limited evidence on availability of WASH services in HCFs in the Greater Kampala Metropolitan Area (GKMA). This study assessed the availability of WASH services within HCFs in the GKMA in order to inform policy and WASH programming.
Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in 60 HCFs. Availability of WASH services in the study HCFs was assessed using a validated WASH Conditions (WASHCon) tool comprising of structured interviews, HCF observations and microbial water quality analysis. Data were analysed using Stata 14 software and R software.
Results: Overall, 84.5% (49/58) and 12.1% (7/58) of HCFs had limited and basic WASH service respectively. About 48.3% (28/58) had limited water service, 84.5% (49/58) had limited sanitation service, 50.0% (29/58) had limited environmental cleanliness service, 56.9% (33/58) had limited hand hygiene service, and 51.7% (30/58) had limited waste management service. About 94.4% of public HCFs had limited WASH service compared to only 68.2% of private not for profit facilities. More health centre IIIs, 92.5% and health centre IVs (85.7%) had limited WASH service compared to hospitals (54.5%).
Conclusions: Our findings indicate that provision of water, sanitation, hand hygiene, environmental cleanliness, and health care waste management services within HCFs are largely hindered by structural and performance limitations. In spite of these limitations, it is evident that environmental cleanliness and treatment of infectious waste can be attained with better oversight and dedicated personnel. Attaining universal WASH coverage in HCFs will require deliberate and strategic investments across the different domains.
Loading...