ReviewRisk management and healthcare policy2023
Dissecting WASH Assessment Tools and Recommending a Comprehensive Tool for Indian Healthcare Facilities.
Review in Risk management and healthcare policy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Providing adequate Water Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) in Health Care Facilities (HCFs) has many benefits, including achieving Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and Universal Health Coverage (UHC). However, there is a significant shortage of statistics on the status of WASH in Healthcare Facilities (WinHCF), resulting in roadblocks in developing improvement strategies. Further, there is a lack of detailed comparison of WASH components covered in available tools against the standards. The present study aims to dissect the national and international tools for WASH assessment in HCFs to suggest comprehensive WASH indicators. The databases like PubMed, Scopus, ScopeMed, Cochrane and Google Scholar were used to extract the available tools. The assessment process, methodology, and components of national and various international tools were compared and synthesized. A total of seven tools, namely WASH FIT 2, Facet, SARA, SPA, TOOL BOX-II, CDC and Kayakalp, were compared on eight components: water, sanitation, hand hygiene, healthcare waste, environmental cleaning and hygiene, infrastructure, workforce management, policy and protocols. Although most tools have covered the same indicators, the methodology and definitions differ. Few of the tools fail to capture the basic indicators defined by Joint Monitoring Programme (JMP). The critical indicators of policy and protocols are only covered in WASH FIT 2, Kayakalp, and TOOL BOX-II. Likewise, most tools fail to capture the indicator of cleaning, IPC practices and climate resilience. The present review also highlighted the limitations of selected tools regarding definitions, methodology and implementation. Hence, based on the review findings, a comprehensive short tool has been developed to monitor WASH in HCF of India. It comprises all the essential fundamental indicators identified from various tools, and recommended by the JMP service ladder with proper definitions. This tool can be helpful for hospital staff and managers for the routine monitoring of WASH in HCFs and improve the quality of care and IPC practices in HCFs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.