Gangarosa Department of Environmental Health, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.
Emory Ethiopia, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia.
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2023 May 1;108(6):1277-1286. doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.22-0603. Print 2023 Jun 7.
Many water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) interventions target improvements in personal hygiene behaviors. Yet measuring personal hygiene behaviors is a challenge due to a lack of reliable, valid, objective, and simple-to-use approaches. The purpose of this study was to examine differences between two types of hygiene outcome measures and their ability to detect relationships between WASH-related behavioral factors and behaviors. We compared hygiene outcomes generated by the Quantitative Personal Hygiene Assessment Tool (qPHAT), which yields objective measures of cleanliness on an 11-point scale, and those generated by conventional, dichotomous indicators of cleanliness. We used cross-sectional data on hygiene outcomes related to facial and hand cleanliness collected during the Andilaye Trial, an impact evaluation of a community-based WASH intervention implemented in Amhara, Ethiopia. We fit multivariable models to examine associations between measures of children's facial and hand cleanliness, via both qPHAT and dichotomous indicators, and 1) household WASH conditions, 2) psychosocial factors, and 3) reported personal hygiene practices. The qPHAT-generated outcomes were able to detect relationships between intermediate behavioral factors and hygiene outcomes that dichotomous indicators were not, including associations with water insecurity and various psychosocial factors. qPHAT-generated outcomes were negatively associated with reported face washing practices, suggesting a bias in reported behaviors. Our study highlights the limitations of reported practices and dichotomous hygiene indicators and indicates that using more quantitative hygiene outcome measures, such as those generated by qPHAT, may reveal important intermediate factors that influence hygiene behavior and support improved monitoring and evaluation of interventions.
许多水、环境卫生和个人卫生(WASH)干预措施旨在改善个人卫生行为。然而,由于缺乏可靠、有效、客观和易于使用的方法,衡量个人卫生行为是一个挑战。本研究的目的是检验两种卫生结果测量方法的差异及其检测与 WASH 相关行为因素和行为之间关系的能力。我们比较了通过定量个人卫生评估工具(qPHAT)生成的卫生结果,该工具在 11 分制上提供了清洁度的客观衡量标准,以及通过传统的、二分法的清洁度指标生成的卫生结果。我们使用了来自埃塞俄比亚阿姆哈拉地区基于社区的 WASH 干预措施的影响评估项目 Andilaye 试验中收集的与面部和手部清洁度相关的卫生结果的横截面数据。我们通过 qPHAT 和二分法指标拟合多变量模型,检验了儿童面部和手部清洁度的测量值与 1)家庭 WASH 条件、2)心理社会因素以及 3)报告的个人卫生习惯之间的关联。qPHAT 生成的结果能够检测中间行为因素与卫生结果之间的关系,而二分法指标则无法检测到,包括与水不安全和各种心理社会因素的关联。qPHAT 生成的结果与报告的洗脸行为呈负相关,这表明报告的行为存在偏差。我们的研究强调了报告的行为和二分法卫生指标的局限性,并表明使用更定量的卫生结果测量方法,如 qPHAT 生成的方法,可能会揭示影响卫生行为的重要中间因素,并支持对干预措施的改进监测和评估。