ArticleBMC public health2026
Evaluating the acceptability of a portable handwashing intervention (the Spatap) in three Fijian communities, a mixed-methods study.
Article in BMC public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWater, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) interventions in resource-constrained communities can improve health outcomes, but uptake and sustainability are influenced by acceptability. We evaluated the acceptability of the Spatap, a portable silicone tap attached to a bottle, as a household handwashing intervention in Fijian communities.
methodsWe distributed Spataps in three communities and conducted a survey two to seven days later, assessing sociodemographic factors, WASH access, and Spatap acceptability (n = 207). We applied a novel quantitative approach, calculating a total acceptability score from seven Likert-scale questions aligned with the component constructs of the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (with a maximum score of 35) and asked open-ended questions about barriers and enablers to Spatap use. We analysed scores and used multiple linear models to examine predictors. Five months later, we conducted three focus group discussions (FGD) (n = 22) to supplement the survey data and performed thematic analysis using NVivo (ver 12).
resultsSpatap acceptability scores ranged from 18 to 35 (median 29), indicating high overall acceptability. Burden and opportunity cost scored lower than other component constructs. Sociodemographic factors were not meaningfully associated with acceptability scores. Few barriers were reported: ease of use, water saving, and convenience were key enablers. FGDs largely supported the survey findings and additionally highlighted ease of use for children and perceived illness reduction as contributors to acceptability. Time spent refilling bottles was burdensome in some larger households, the cost of larger bottles was prohibitive for some, and minor leakage issues were reported.
conclusionsThe Spatap was broadly acceptable in the study communities, particularly where its portability, ease of use, and water-saving potential addressed locally important needs. These findings suggest the Spatap may have value as a household WASH intervention in resource-constrained settings, though its appropriateness relative to lower-cost alternatives should be considered. Future implementations should assess the cost-effectiveness and availability of suitable bottles, provide local language and pictorial instructions, and consider targeted engagement with children. The acceptability score method showed potential as a rapid evaluation tool but requires refinement before reapplication.
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.