ArticleEnvironmental health insights2024
Fecal Sludge Management and Sanitation Safety: An Assessment in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Article in Environmental health insights, 2024. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Sanitation safety practices and risks associated with fecal sludge management are crucial for public health and the environment. This study assessed sanitation safety practices and risks in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, at different stages of fecal sludge management. The research aimed to understand the current state of sanitation facilities, practices, and associated risks and identify areas for improvement. Materials and Methods: A mixed methods/approach was employed, utilizing household surveys, risk assessments, and sanitary inspections. A total of 384 study subjects were interviewed using face-to-face interviews and observations. Results: The findings revealed that the majority of households (97.7%) had consistent access to toilets, with flush/pour flush toilets being the most common type (47.4%). Factors such as odors in toilets or septic tanks, open defecation by children, and the use of untreated wastewater for food production were significantly associated with sociodemographic factors. Risk assessments indicated that 67% of households fell into the low-risk category, while 33% were classified as intermediate risk. The study identified non-compliance issues during sanitary inspections at transfer stations (45%), a wastewater treatment and disposal facility (61.5%), and in the management of wastewater and sludge in the sewer line (64%). These findings call for urgent actions to address improper feces disposal, inadequate maintenance of sanitation facilities, and unsafe practices in fecal sludge management. Conclusion: This study identified concerning issues in fecal sludge management, including improper feces disposal, inadequate facility maintenance, and non-compliance with safety standards during emptying, transport, treatment, and disposal. Urgent action is needed to address these risks. Promoting proper disposal techniques, improving facility maintenance, education programs, strengthening regulations, providing training and protective equipment, and investing in enhanced sanitation facilities and wastewater treatment methods are essential for improving sanitation safety practices.
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.