A cluster-randomized multi-level intervention to increase latrine use and safe disposal of child feces in rural Odisha, India: the Sundara Grama research protocol

Bethany A Caruso, Gloria D Sclar, Parimita Routray, Fiona Majorin, Corey Nagel, Thomas Clasen, Bethany A Caruso, Gloria D Sclar, Parimita Routray, Fiona Majorin, Corey Nagel, Thomas Clasen

Abstract

Background: Despite health benefits of sanitation, an estimated 12% of the global population practices open defecation, including an estimated 50% of the population of India. Current estimates, however, do not include households that own toilets but do not use them, suggesting that the actual number of people defecating in the open is underestimated. This protocol describes a cluster randomized controlled trial to evaluate an intervention specifically designed to increase latrine use, including the safe disposal of child feces, in rural Odisha, India.

Methods: The trial engages 66 villages in Puri district, 33 randomly allocated to receive the intervention and 33 to serve as controls. The primary outcome is latrine use and is recorded at baseline and endline for all members of all households that own latrines in all trial vilalges. Additional data on determinants of latrine use and safe child feces disposal are also collected to assess change based on the intervetntion. A process evaluation assesses the delivery of the intervention and qualiative research takes place in non-trial villages as well as post-endline in trial villages to help explain trial findings.

Discussion: This is one of four trials taking place simultaneously in rural India with latrine use as the primary outcome. All four studies use the same outcome to gerenate comparable data across sites that can serve the government of India. The trial in Odisha is unique in that it collects latrine use data from all potential users in all households that own latrines, enabling a thorough view of the sanitation situation and factors that influence use at the community level. That latrine use is collected via self-report is a limitation, however any bias in reporting should be the same across villages and not impact the overall assessment of intervention impact.

Trial registration: This trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03274245 .

Keywords: Behavior change; Motivations; Multi-level intervention; Open defecation; Risk perceptions; Sanitation; Social norms; Theory-based intervention; Toilet.

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Study protocols have been reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board at Emory University in Atlanta Georgia (00098293) and the Ethics Review Committee at Xavier Institute of Management in Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India. Relevant changes to the study protocol will be approved by the Institutional Review Board before changes are made in the field. Prior to quantitative and/or qualitative data collection, all participants will be read a consent document by trained research assistants in Odia, the local language, that describes the study and objectives. Research assistants will then ask for the participants’ verbal consent before continuing with data collection. The use of verbal consent (over written) was approved by the Institutional Review Board. Verbal consent was approved as not all adults in the engaged communities are literate and may feel vulnerable signing something they are not able to read. In some cases, women specifically may not be able to sign their name or may not feel they have the agency to sign something. Only members of the research team will have access to particpants names and identifying information.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

One of the authors (BAC) serves as a member of the editorial board for BMC Public Health.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow Diagram for Cluster Randomised Trial to Assess Impact of Sundara Grama Intervention on Latrine Use in Rural Odisha, India

References

    1. Freeman MC, Garn JV, Sclar GD, Boisson S, Medlicott K, Alexander KT, et al. The impact of sanitation on infectious disease and nutritional status: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Hyg Environ Health. 2017;220(6):928–949. doi: 10.1016/j.ijheh.2017.05.007.
    1. JMP. Progress on drinking water, sanitation and hygiene: 2017 Update and SDG Baselines. Joint Monitoring Program, World Health Organization, UNICEF; 2017 July 12, 2017.
    1. Garn JV, Sclar GD, Freeman MC, Penakalapati G, Alexander KT, Brooks P, et al. The impact of sanitation interventions on latrine coverage and latrine use: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Hyg Environ Health. 2017;220(2):329–340. doi: 10.1016/j.ijheh.2016.10.001.
    1. WHO/UNICEF. Progress on drinking water and sanitation: 2015 update and MDG assessment. Geneva; 2015.
    1. Puri District: Census 2011-2019 data. . Accessed 4 Mar 2019.
    1. Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation. Swachh Bharat Mission- Gramin [updated 20 November 2018. Available from: .
    1. Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation. Swachh Bharat Mission- Gramin Dashboard [updated 3 December 2018. Available from: .
    1. Coffey D, Gupta A, Hathi P, KhCoffey D, Gupta A, Hathi P, KhCoffey D, Gupta A, Hathi P, KhCoffey D, Gupta A, Hathi P, Khurana N, Spears D, Srivastav N, et al. Revealed preference for open defecation. Econ Polit Wkly. 2014;49(38):43.
    1. Gupta AN, Khalid D, Desphande P, Hathi A, Kapur N, Srivastav S, Vyas D. Spears and D. Coffey. Changes in Open Defecation in Rural North India: 2019;2014-2018
    1. Barnard S, Routray P, Majorin F, Peletz R, Boisson S, Sinha A, et al. Impact of Indian Total sanitation campaign on latrine coverage and use: a cross-sectional study in Orissa three years following programme implementation. PLoS One. 2013;8(8):e71438. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0071438.
    1. Clasen T, Boisson S, Routray P, Torondel B, Bell M, Cumming O, et al. Effectiveness of a rural sanitation programme on diarrhoea, soil-transmitted helminth infection, and child malnutrition in Odisha, India: a cluster-randomised trial. Lancet Glob Health. 2014;2(11):e645–ee53. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(14)70307-9.
    1. Patil SR, Arnold BF, Salvatore AL, Briceno B, Ganguly S, Colford JM, Jr, et al. The effect of India's total sanitation campaign on defecation behaviors and child health in rural Madhya Pradesh: a cluster randomized controlled trial. 2014.
    1. Luby S. Is targeting access to sanitation enough? Lancet Glob Health. 2014;2(11):e619–ee20. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(14)70326-2.
    1. Coffey D, Gupta A, Hathi P, Spears D, Srivastav N, Vyas S. The puzzle of widespread open defecation in rural India: evidence from new qualitative and quantitative data: Working Paper; 2015.
    1. Coffey D, Spears D, Vyas S. Switching to sanitation: understanding latrine adoption in a representative panel of rural Indian households. Soc Sci Med. 2017.
    1. Routray P, Schmidt W-P, Boisson S, Clasen T, Jenkins MW. Socio-cultural and behavioural factors constraining latrine adoption in rural coastal Odisha: an exploratory qualitative study. BMC Public Health. 2015;15(1):880. doi: 10.1186/s12889-015-2206-3.
    1. Sinha A, Nagel CL, Schmidt WP, Torondel B, Boisson S, Routray P, et al. Assessing patterns and determinants of latrine use in rural settings: a longitudinal study in Odisha, India. Int J Hyg Environ Health. 2017;220(5):906–915. doi: 10.1016/j.ijheh.2017.05.004.
    1. O'Reilly K, Dhanju R, Goel A. Exploring “the remote” and “the rural”: open defecation and latrine use in Uttarakhand, India. World Dev. 2017;93:193–205. doi: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2016.12.022.
    1. Freeman MC, Majorin F, Boisson S, Routray P, Torondel B, Clasen T. The impact of a rural sanitation programme on safe disposal of child faeces: a cluster randomised trial in Odisha, India. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 2016;110(7):386–392. doi: 10.1093/trstmh/trw043.
    1. Majorin F, Freeman MC, Barnard S, Routray P, Boisson S, Clasen T. Child feces disposal practices in rural Orissa: a cross sectional study. PLoS One. 2014;9(2).
    1. WSP. Management of Child Feces: Current Disposal Practices. 2015.
    1. Curtis V, Kanki B, Mertens T, Traore E, Diallo I, Tall F, et al. Potties, pits and pipes: explaining hygiene behaviour in Burkina Faso. Soc Sci Med. 1995;41(3):383–394. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(94)00341-P.
    1. Azage M, Haile D. Factors associated with safe child feces disposal practices in Ethiopia: evidence from demographic and health survey. Archives of Public Health. 2015;73(1):40. doi: 10.1186/s13690-015-0090-z.
    1. Miller-Petrie MK, Voigt L, McLennan L, Cairncross S, Jenkins MW. Infant and young child feces management and enabling products for their hygienic collection, transport, and disposal in Cambodia. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2016;94(2):456–465. doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.15-0423.
    1. Bawankule R, Singh A, Kumar K, Pedgaonkar S. Disposal of children’s stools and its association with childhood diarrhea in India. BMC Public Health. 2017;17(1):12. doi: 10.1186/s12889-016-3948-2.
    1. International Institute for Population Sciences (IIPS) and ICF. National Family Health Survey (NFHS-4), 2015–16: District Fact Sheet Puri Odisha. Mumbai: IIPS; 2017.
    1. International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie). Promoting Latrine Use in Rural India [Available from: .
    1. Hayes RJ, Moulton LH. Cluster randomised trials: Chapman and Hall/CRC; 2017.
    1. Clasen T, Boisson S, Routray P, Cumming O, Jenkins M, Ensink JH, et al. The effect of improved rural sanitation on diarrhoea and helminth infection: design of a cluster-randomized trial in Orissa, India. Emerging themes in epidemiology. 2012;9(1):7. doi: 10.1186/1742-7622-9-7.
    1. Sinha A, Nagel CL, Thomas E, Schmidt WP, Torondel B, Boisson S, et al. Assessing latrine use in rural India: a cross-sectional study comparing reported use and passive latrine use monitors. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2016;95(3):720–727. doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.16-0102.
    1. Arnold BF, Hogan DR, Colford JM, Hubbard AE. Simulation methods to estimate design power: an overview for applied research. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011;11(1):94. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-11-94.
    1. Hemming K, Marsh J. A menu-driven facility for sample-size calculations in cluster randomized controlled trials. Stata J. 2013;13(1):114–135. doi: 10.1177/1536867X1301300109.
    1. Hartung C, Anokwa Y, Brunette W, Lerer A, Tseng C, Borriello G. Open data kit: tools to build information services for developing regions. [Available from: .

Source: PubMed

3
S'abonner