ArticleHealth science reports2026
Healthcare Waste Management Practices and Facilitators and Barriers in Primary Healthcare Facilities: A Mixed-Methods Study in Kathmandu, Nepal.
Article in Health science reports, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Effective healthcare waste management (HCWM) is crucial for preventing infection and protecting the environment. Primary healthcare facilities (HCFs) in low-resource settings often demonstrate inadequate practices. This study assessed HCWM practices and explored facilitators and barriers to safe HCWM practices in the public primary healthcare facilities of Kathmandu District, Nepal, focusing on segregation, internal collection, storage, treatment, and disposal practices. Methods: A cross-sectional study using a concurrent triangulation mixed-methods approach was conducted in public primary healthcare facilities under four local government units in Kathmandu District. For the quantitative component, 24 facilities were purposively selected. Data were collected through interviewer-administered structured questionnaires with the HCWM focal person or facility in charge as well as through facility observations using the Minimum Service Standards (MSS) assessment tool. For the qualitative component, in-depth interviews (IDIs) were conducted with focal persons or facility in-charges from 11 facilities selected from the 24 using convenience sampling. HCWM practices were categorized based on MSS scores. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics, while qualitative data were analyzed thematically using Braun and Clarke's framework. Results: Overall, 70.8% of HCFs scored below 50% on MSS, indicating poor HCWM performance. While waste segregation at the source was high (95.8%), adherence to color-coded bins and labeling was low (45.8% each). Sharp waste segregation was universal, but 37.5% reported unsafe safety box accumulation. Only 12.5% had autoclaves, and 83.3% disposed of infectious waste without prior treatment, and 70.8% disposed of infectious waste via municipal systems. Key barriers were limited space, inadequate training, weak supervision, and a lack of disposal mechanisms, whereas facilitators included staff awareness, designated handlers, MSS programs, and external support. Conclusion: The findings highlight gaps in HCWM practices in primary HCFs. The results suggest that interventions such as centralized or on-site treatment of hazardous waste, along with regular staff training and supervision, may help improve HCWM 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.