Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34328886›Full record

ArticleThe Science of the total environment2021

Innovation for improved hand hygiene: Field testing the Autarky handwashing station in collaboration with informal settlement residents in Durban, South Africa.

Catherine Sutherland, Eva Reynaert, Rebecca C Sindall, Michel E Riechmann, Fanelesibonge Magwaza, Juri Lienert, Sibongile Buthelezi, Duduzile Khumalo, Sifiso Dhlamini, Eberhard Morgenroth and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Science of the total environment, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Catherine SutherlandUniversity of KwaZulu Natal, School of Built Environment and Development Studies, 4041 Durban, South Africa.
Eva ReynaertEawag, Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology, 8600 Dübendorf, Switzerland; ETH Zürich, Institute of Environmental Engineering, 8093 Zürich, Switzerland. Electronic address: eva.reynaert@eawag.ch.
Rebecca C SindallUniversity of KwaZulu Natal, WASH R&D Centre, 4041 Durban, South Africa.
Michel E RiechmannEawag, Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology, 8600 Dübendorf, Switzerland.
Fanelesibonge MagwazaUniversity of KwaZulu Natal, School of Built Environment and Development Studies, 4041 Durban, South Africa.
Juri LienertEawag, Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology, 8600 Dübendorf, Switzerland.
Sibongile ButheleziUniversity of KwaZulu Natal, School of Built Environment and Development Studies, 4041 Durban, South Africa.
Duduzile KhumaloUniversity of KwaZulu Natal, School of Built Environment and Development Studies, 4041 Durban, South Africa.
Sifiso DhlaminiUniversity of KwaZulu Natal, WASH R&D Centre, 4041 Durban, South Africa.
Eberhard MorgenrothEawag, Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology, 8600 Dübendorf, Switzerland; ETH Zürich, Institute of Environmental Engineering, 8093 Zürich, Switzerland.
Kai M UdertEawag, Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology, 8600 Dübendorf, Switzerland; ETH Zürich, Institute of Environmental Engineering, 8093 Zürich, Switzerland.
University of KwaZulu-Natal · ZASwiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology · CHETH Zurich · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Safe and accessible water services for hand hygiene are critical to human health and well-being. However, access to handwashing facilities is limited in cities in the Global South, where rapid urbanisation, service backlogs, lack of infrastructure and capacity, and water scarcity impact on the ability of local governments to provide them. Community participation and the co-production of knowledge in the development of innovative technologies, which are aligned with Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) principles, can lead to more sustainable and socially-acceptable hand hygiene systems. This paper presents the outcomes of the testing of the Autarky handwashing station, a technology that provides onsite treatment and recycling of handwashing water, in an informal settlement in Durban, South Africa. The transdisciplinary research approach adopted enabled the participation of multiple stakeholders with different knowledge systems in the framing, testing and evaluation of the system. The process of co-producing knowledge, as well as the outcomes of the testing, namely high levels of functionality and social acceptability of the technology, supported the WASH principles. The evaluation revealed that the Autarky handwashing station is a niche intervention that improved access to safe and appealing handwashing facilities in an informal settlement. Its novel design, socially desirable features, reliability and ability to save water increased its acceptance in the community. The testing of the system in a real-world context revealed the value of including communities in knowledge production processes for technology innovation. Further work is required to ensure that real-time monitoring of system function is feasible before such systems can be implemented at larger scale.

Indexed as

Hand DisinfectionHand HygieneHumansReproducibility of ResultsSanitationSouth AfricaWater SupplyCommunity participationHand hygieneTechnology field testTransdisciplinary researchWASHWater recycling

Identifiers

PMID34328886
PMCPMC8607321
OpenAlexW3178318234

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.