当社グループは 3,000 以上の世界的なカンファレンスシリーズ 米国、ヨーロッパ、世界中で毎年イベントが開催されます。 1,000 のより科学的な学会からの支援を受けたアジア および 700 以上の オープン アクセスを発行ジャーナルには 50,000 人以上の著名人が掲載されており、科学者が編集委員として名高い

オープンアクセスジャーナルはより多くの読者と引用を獲得
700 ジャーナル 15,000,000 人の読者 各ジャーナルは 25,000 人以上の読者を獲得

インデックス付き
  • 索引コペルニクス
  • Google スカラー
  • シェルパ・ロミオ
  • Genamics JournalSeek
  • セーフティライト付き
  • レフシーク
  • ハムダード大学
  • エブスコ アリゾナ州
  • OCLC-WorldCat
  • パブロン
  • ジュネーブ医学教育研究財団
  • ユーロパブ
  • ICMJE
このページをシェアする

抽象的な

Latrine Utilization and Associated Factors in Rural Community of Aneded District, North West Ethiopia, 2014

Chanie T, Gedefaw M, Ketema K

Background: Proper disposal of human excreta remains a challenge especially in low income countries including Ethiopia. About 80% of the disease burden is related to poor sanitation and hygiene in the country. Cognizant of challenges, health extension program has been widely implemented longer. Latrine facility coverage of study area was higher but its utilization remained lower. Level of latrine utilization and factors associated with latrine utilization of the study area were not known. Therefore, evidences were required to show the current situation of latrine utilization in the study area.
Objective: The main objective of this study was to assess level of latrine utilization by households and associated factors in Aneded District, East Gojam Zone, Northwest Ethiopia.
Methods: A community based cross-sectional study was conducted from March 8 to April 9 /2014. Semistructured questionnaires and simple structured observation checklist to confirm evidences were data collection tools. Data was analyzed using SPSS version 16. Possible associations were assessed using logistic regression, and strength of association was measured using odds ratio at p-value <0.05 and 95% confidence interval. Result: The response rate was 99.8%, and the mean age of head of households was 39.25(± 12.56 SD). The level of latrine utilization in rural community of Aneded district was 63%. Significantly associated factors for latrine utilization in the district were the following:
Clean latrine facility (AOR: 4.1, 95%CI [1.7,10.0], bad latrine facility (AOR: 0.2, 95% CI[0.5,0.9]), presence of children in the household (AOR: 2.5, 95%CI [1.0,6.0]), traditional hat latrine facility (AOR: 7.4, 95%CI [1.1, 49.0]), and age of families (AOR: 9.1, 95%CI [1.8,45]).
Conclusion and recommendation: Latrine utilization in the study area was far from expected national target of 100% in MDGs. Not all constructed latrine facilities were used. Factors such as bad latrine facility and cleanliness of latrine facilities still need additional efforts. Health education should be given intensively to communities focusing on behavioral change communication, and good status and cleanliness of latrine facilities to improve its utilization.