Community-Led Total Sanitation implementation in Malawi: process evaluation of a sanitation and hygiene intervention.

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Global Public Health Pub Date : 2026-12-31 Epub Date: 2026-02-28 DOI:10.1080/17441692.2026.2638018
Mindy Panulo, Kondwani Chidziwisano, Clara MacLeod, Timeyo Kapazga, Robert Dreibelbis, Tara K Beattie, Tracy Morse
{"title":"Community-Led Total Sanitation implementation in Malawi: process evaluation of a sanitation and hygiene intervention.","authors":"Mindy Panulo, Kondwani Chidziwisano, Clara MacLeod, Timeyo Kapazga, Robert Dreibelbis, Tara K Beattie, Tracy Morse","doi":"10.1080/17441692.2026.2638018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Community-Led Total Sanitation (CLTS) seeks to eliminate open defecation by empowering households to adopt improved sanitation and hygiene behaviours. While widely integrated into national sanitation strategies of low- and middle-income countries, limited evidence exists on how implementation processes drive behaviour change. This study aimed to evaluate the implementation fidelity, reach, dose, adaptation, and mechanisms of impact of a CLTS intervention in Chiradzulu District, Malawi. We conducted a retrospective mixed methods process evaluation between January 2022 and February 2023, using 1,151 household surveys, 36 in-depth interviews, and 28 focus group discussions with community members and implementers. Outcomes assessed were latrine and handwashing facility (HWF) availability, with logistic regression used to explore associations with intervention exposure. All planned activities were delivered, but fidelity was variable ranging from low fidelity for training delivery to high fidelity for household engagement. Intervention reach was suboptimal, with limited household contact and low recall of hygiene campaigns. Combined exposure to both community and household-based activities significantly increased odds of latrine ownership (OR = 1.63, CI = 1.55-1.72) and HWF presence (OR = 1.39, CI = 1.03-1.86). CLTS programmes should strengthen intervention fidelity, integrate affordable climate resilient facilities, and strengthen household-based engagement to enhance sustainability and impact.</p>","PeriodicalId":12735,"journal":{"name":"Global Public Health","volume":"21 1","pages":"2638018"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17441692.2026.2638018","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/2/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Community-Led Total Sanitation (CLTS) seeks to eliminate open defecation by empowering households to adopt improved sanitation and hygiene behaviours. While widely integrated into national sanitation strategies of low- and middle-income countries, limited evidence exists on how implementation processes drive behaviour change. This study aimed to evaluate the implementation fidelity, reach, dose, adaptation, and mechanisms of impact of a CLTS intervention in Chiradzulu District, Malawi. We conducted a retrospective mixed methods process evaluation between January 2022 and February 2023, using 1,151 household surveys, 36 in-depth interviews, and 28 focus group discussions with community members and implementers. Outcomes assessed were latrine and handwashing facility (HWF) availability, with logistic regression used to explore associations with intervention exposure. All planned activities were delivered, but fidelity was variable ranging from low fidelity for training delivery to high fidelity for household engagement. Intervention reach was suboptimal, with limited household contact and low recall of hygiene campaigns. Combined exposure to both community and household-based activities significantly increased odds of latrine ownership (OR = 1.63, CI = 1.55-1.72) and HWF presence (OR = 1.39, CI = 1.03-1.86). CLTS programmes should strengthen intervention fidelity, integrate affordable climate resilient facilities, and strengthen household-based engagement to enhance sustainability and impact.

马拉维社区主导的全面环境卫生实施:环境卫生和个人卫生干预的过程评估。
社区主导的全面环卫(CLTS)旨在通过增强家庭采取改善的环境卫生和个人卫生行为来消除露天排便。虽然已被广泛纳入低收入和中等收入国家的国家卫生战略,但关于实施过程如何推动行为改变的证据有限。本研究旨在评估马拉维Chiradzulu地区CLTS干预的实施保真度、覆盖范围、剂量、适应性和影响机制。我们在2022年1月至2023年2月期间进行了回顾性混合方法过程评估,使用了1151个家庭调查,36个深度访谈和28个与社区成员和实施者的焦点小组讨论。评估的结果是厕所和洗手设施(HWF)的可用性,并使用逻辑回归来探索与干预暴露的关系。所有计划的活动都被交付,但是保真度是可变的,从培训交付的低保真度到家庭参与的高保真度不等。干预范围不理想,家庭接触有限,卫生运动召回率低。社区和家庭活动的联合暴露显著增加了厕所拥有率(OR = 1.63, CI = 1.55-1.72)和HWF存在率(OR = 1.39, CI = 1.03-1.86)。CLTS项目应加强干预的保真度,整合负担得起的气候适应型设施,并加强以家庭为基础的参与,以提高可持续性和影响力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Global Public Health
Global Public Health PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
3.00%
发文量
120
期刊介绍: Global Public Health is an essential peer-reviewed journal that energetically engages with key public health issues that have come to the fore in the global environment — mounting inequalities between rich and poor; the globalization of trade; new patterns of travel and migration; epidemics of newly-emerging and re-emerging infectious diseases; the HIV/AIDS pandemic; the increase in chronic illnesses; escalating pressure on public health infrastructures around the world; and the growing range and scale of conflict situations, terrorist threats, environmental pressures, natural and human-made disasters.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书