Back

The effect of community-based behaviour change interventions on observed handwashing and child faeces disposal in rural Malawi: a controlled before-and-after (CBA) trial

MacLeod, C.; Panulo, M. F.; Wells, J.; White, B.; Ross, I.; Morse, T.; Dreibelbis, R.; Chidziwisano, K.

2025-06-13 public and global health
10.1101/2025.06.12.25329256 medRxiv
Show abstract

IntroductionWhile hygiene promotion is frequently included in sanitation programmes, few studies directly evaluate the effect of these interventions on hygiene outcomes. We assessed the effectiveness of a district-level Community-led Total Sanitation (CLTS) intervention with and without locally managed Care Groups (CG) on observed sanitation and hygiene behaviours in a rural area of Chiradzulu District, Malawi. MethodsThis was a controlled before-and-after trial with two intervention arms and a control group implemented in three sub-districts (also known as Traditional Authorities [TAs]) in Chiradzulu District, Malawi. Two TAs received CLTS, which included an additional low-intensity government-led hygiene promotion campaign. One TA received the standard CLTS intervention (CLTS group), and one received the same intervention but with additional sanitation and hygiene promotion delivered through local Care Groups (CLTS+CG group). The third TA served as the control group. Hygiene and child faeces disposal outcomes were measured by fieldworker direct observation in a purposively sampled subset of 96 to 140 households per arm enrolled in the main trial at baseline (June 2023) and at endline (May 2024). We estimated intervention effects on observed handwashing behaviour and safe child faeces disposal with hierarchical logistic regression models. ResultsIn our per protocol analysis, neither intervention was associated with differences in observed handwashing with soap compared to the control arm nor with differences in observed child faeces disposal. Additional analyses found that both interventions were associated with large increases in hand rinsing with water only compared to control groups (CLTS+CG group adjusted relative risk ratio [aRRR] = 2.80, CI = 1.81, 4.33; CLTS group aRRR = 1.76, CI = 1.10, 2.83). The CLTS+CG intervention was associated with a slight increase in hand rinsing compared to the CLTS only group (aRRR = 1.65, CI = 1.01, 2.69). ConclusionThe CLTS+CG and CLTS interventions were associated with an increase in hand rinsing at critical junctures but not handwashing with soap, suggesting that current hygiene programmes require further focus on soap access and use. Future research should investigate barriers to the availability and competing uses of soap in households. Both interventions did not increase safe child faeces disposal, though the sample size was small. Future research should investigate further integration of child faeces management into CLTS and CG behaviour change interventions.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.4%
2
BMJ Global Health
113 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
7.9%
3
PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
466 papers in training set
Top 1%
7.9%
4
PLOS Global Public Health
344 papers in training set
Top 2%
7.2%
5
PLOS Water
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.7%
6
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 28%
5.5%
50% of probability mass above
7
BMJ Open
601 papers in training set
Top 5%
4.3%
8
BMJ Public Health
25 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.2%
9
BMC Public Health
158 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.2%
10
PLOS Medicine
110 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.4%
11
The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
68 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.7%
12
Malaria Journal
58 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.7%
13
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 48%
1.4%
14
BMC Infectious Diseases
133 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.1%
15
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 57%
1.1%
16
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
128 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.1%
17
BMC Medicine
176 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.1%
18
Open Research Europe
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.1%
19
Epidemics
116 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
20
The Lancet Public Health
20 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.9%
21
Environmental Research
49 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
22
Systematic Reviews
15 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.8%
23
Environmental Health Perspectives
17 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
24
The Lancet Infectious Diseases
73 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
25
The Lancet Global Health
27 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.6%
26
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 78%
0.6%
27
International Journal of Infectious Diseases
129 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.6%
28
Environmental Science & Technology
64 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%