Could Alcohol-Based Hand Sanitizer Be an Option for Hand Hygiene for Households in Rural Bangladesh?

In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), hand sanitizer may be a convenient alternative to soap and water to increase hand hygiene practices. We explored perceptions, acceptability, and use of hand sanitizer in rural Bangladesh. We enrolled 120 households from three rural villages. Promoters distributed free alcohol-based hand sanitizer, installed handwashing stations (bucket with tap, stand, basin, and bottle for soapy water), and conducted household visits and community meetings. During Phase 1, promoters recommended handwashing with soap or soapy water, or hand sanitizer after defecation, after cleaning a child's anus/feces, and before food preparation. In Phase 2, they recommended separate key times for hand sanitizer: before touching a child ≤ 6 months and after returning home. Three to 4 months after each intervention phase, we conducted a survey, in-depth interviews, and group discussions with child caregivers and male household members. After Phase 1, 82/89 (92%) households reported handwashing with soap after defecation versus 38 (43%) reported hand sanitizer use. Participants thought soap and water removed dirt from their hands, whereas hand sanitizer killed germs. In Phase 2, 76/87 (87%) reported using hand sanitizer after returning home and 71/87 (82%) before touching a child ≤ 6 months. Qualitative study participants reported that Phase 2-recommended times for hand sanitizer use were acceptable, but handwashing with soap was preferred over hand sanitizer when there was uncertainty over choosing between the two. Hand sanitizer use was liked by household members and has potential for use in LMICs, including during the coronavirus pandemic.

Effectiveness of a Behavior Change Intervention with Hand Sanitizer Use and Respiratory Hygiene in Reducing Laboratory-Confirmed Influenza among Schoolchildren in Bangladesh: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial.

Schoolchildren are commonly linked to influenza transmission. Handwashing with soap has been shown to decrease infections; however, improving handwashing practices using soap and water is difficult in low-resource settings. In these settings, alternative hygiene options, such as hand sanitizer, could improve handwashing promotion to reduce influenza virus infections. We conducted a cluster randomized control trial in 24 primary schools in Dhaka to assess the effectiveness of hand sanitizer and a respiratory hygiene education intervention in reducing influenza-like illness (ILI) and laboratory-confirmed influenza during June-September 2015. Twelve schools were randomly selected to receive hand sanitizer and respiratory hygiene education, and 12 schools received no intervention. Field staff actively followed children daily to monitor for new ILI episodes (cough with fever) through school visits and by phone if a child was absent. When an illness episode was identified, medical technologists collected nasal swabs to test for influenza viruses. During the 10-week follow-up period, the incidence of ILI per 1,000 student-weeks was 22 in the intervention group versus 27 in the control group (P-value = 0.4). The incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza was 53% lower in the intervention schools (3/1,000 person-weeks) than in the control schools (6/1,000 person-weeks) (P-value = 0.01). Hand sanitizer and respiratory hygiene education can help to reduce the risk of influenza virus transmission in schools.

Hygiene in Restaurants and among Street Food Vendors in Bangladesh.

Poor hand hygiene and food handling put consumers of restaurant and street food at risk of enteric disease, especially in low-income countries. This study aimed to collect hygiene indicators from a nationally representative sample of restaurants and street food vendors. The field team collected data from 50 rural villages and 50 urban administrative units (mahallas). We explored restaurant service staff, cook, and food vendor hygiene practices (N = 300 restaurants and 600 street food vendors), by observing hygiene facilities, food handling, and utensil cleaning. A qualitative assessment explored perceptions of hygiene related to food handling. During restaurant spot checks, 91% (273/300) had soap and water at handwashing location for customers but in only 33% (100) at locations convenient for restaurant staff. Among street food-vending stalls, 11% (68/600) had soap and water when observed. During 90-minute structured observations, cooks used soap to wash hands on 14/514 (3%) of occasions before food preparation, 6/82 (8%) occasions after cutting fish/meat/vegetables, 3/71 (4%) occasions before serving food, and 0/49 (0%) occasions) before hand-mashing food/salad preparation; no street food vendors washed hands with soap during these food-handling events. Most of the qualitative study participants perceived that customers select a vendor based on tastiness of the food, whereas no one mentioned the importance of food hygiene. The study demonstrates widespread poor hygiene and food-handling practices in restaurants and among food vendors. Based on our study findings, we proposed a food premises Hygiene Investigation Model to create action plans to improve food safety.

Impact of a Large-Scale Handwashing Intervention on Reported Respiratory Illness: Findings from a Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial.

We assessed the impact of handwashing promotion on reported respiratory illness as a secondary outcome from among > 60,000 low-income households enrolled in a cluster-randomized trial conducted in Bangladesh. Ninety geographic clusters were randomly allocated into three groups: cholera-vaccine-only; vaccine-plus-behavior-change (handwashing promotion and drinking water chlorination); and control. Data on respiratory illness (fever plus either cough or nasal congestion or breathing difficulty within previous 2 days) and intervention uptake (presence of soap and water at handwashing station) were collected through monthly surveys conducted among a different subset of randomly selected households during the intervention period. We determined respiratory illness prevalence across groups and used log-binomial regression to examine the association between respiratory illness and presence of soap and water in the handwashing station. Results were adjusted for age, gender, wealth, and cluster-randomized design. The vaccine-plus-behavior-change group had more handwashing stations with soap and water present than controls (45% versus 25%; P < 0.001). Reported respiratory illness prevalence was similar across groups (vaccine-plus-behavior-change versus control: 2.8% versus 2.9%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.008, 0.006; P = 0.6; cholera-vaccine-only versus control: 3.0% versus 2.9%; 95% CI: -0.006, 0.009; P = 0.4). Irrespective of intervention assignment, respiratory illness was lower among people who had soap and water present in the handwashing station than among those who did not (risk ratioadjusted: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.69-0.98). With modest uptake of the handwashing intervention, we found no impact of this large-scale intervention on respiratory illness. However, those who actually had a handwashing station with soap and water had less illness. This suggests improving the effectiveness of handwashing promotion in achieving sustained behavior change could result in health benefits.

WASH Benefits Bangladesh trial: management structure for achieving high coverage in an efficacy trial.

BACKGROUND: Water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) efficacy trials deliver interventions to the target population under optimal conditions to estimate their effects on outcomes of interest, to inform subsequent selection for inclusion in routine programs. A systematic and intensive approach to intervention delivery is required to achieve the high-level uptake necessary to measure efficacy. We describe the intervention delivery system adopted in the WASH Benefits Bangladesh study, as part of a three-paper series on WASH Benefits Intervention Delivery and Performance. METHODS: Community Health Workers (CHWs) delivered individual and combined WASH and nutrition interventions to 4169 enrolled households in geographically matched clusters. Households were provided with free enabling technologies and supplies, integrated with parallel behaviour-change promotion. Behavioural objectives were drinking treated, safely stored water, safe feces disposal, handwashing with soap at key times, and age-appropriate nutrition behaviours (birth to 24 months). The intervention delivery system built on lessons learned from prior WASH intervention effectiveness, implementation, and formative research studies. We recruited local CHWs, residents of the study villages, through transparent merit-based selection methods, and consultation with community leaders. CHW supervisors received training on direct intervention delivery, then trained their assigned CHWs. CHWs in turn used the technologies in their own homes. Each CHW counseled six to eight intervention households spread across a 0.2-2.2-km radius, with a 1:12 supervisor-to-CHW ratio. CHWs met monthly with supervisor-trainers to exchange experiences and adapt technology and behaviour-change approaches to evolving conditions. Intervention uptake was tracked through fidelity measures, with a priori benchmarks necessary for an efficacy study. RESULTS: Sufficient levels of uptake were attained by the fourth intervention assessment month and sustained throughout the intervention period. Periodic internal CHW monitoring resulted in discontinuation of a small number of low performers. CONCLUSIONS: The intensive intervention delivery system required for an efficacy trial differs in many respects from the system for a routine program. To implement a routine program at scale requires further research on how to optimize the supervisor-to-CHW-to-intervention household ratios, as well as other program costs without compromising program effectiveness. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCC01590095 . Registered on 2 May 2012.

Acceptability and Feasibility of Sharing a Soapy Water System for Handwashing in a Low-Income Urban Community in Dhaka, Bangladesh: A Qualitative Study.

Handwashing with soap at key times is an effective means of reducing pathogen transmission. In a low-income community in urban Dhaka, we piloted and evaluated the acceptability and feasibility of a shared handwashing intervention. This included promotion by community health promoters of a homemade solution of detergent powder mixed with water and stored in a 1.5-L reclaimed mineral water bottle. Community health promoters encouraged sharing of the recurrent detergent cost among compound members. Of 152 participating compounds, fieldworkers randomly selected 60 for qualitative assessment. Fieldworkers conducted 30 in-depth interviews and five focus group discussions among purposively selected compound members. The reclaimed bottles served as an easily accessible dispenser for the soapy water, which could feasibly be retained next to the toilet and kitchen areas for communal use. Bottles functioned as a positive reminder for handwashing at recommended key times. Most compounds (45/60, 75%) shared a common soapy water system and its associated costs. There was reluctance to prepare soapy water for shared use in the remaining 25%. Soapy water was an acceptable hand cleaning agent, with the bottle as a feasible dispenser. It was simple in design, cost-effective, replicable, popular with intervention recipient, and neighboring nonrecipients, and commonly shared among nonrelated households. The need to share expenses and product preparation served as a barrier. Developing a sustainable maintenance system, therefore, is critical to ensuring the public health benefits of handwashing with soap.

Effects of water quality, sanitation, handwashing, and nutritional interventions on diarrhoea and child growth in rural Bangladesh: a cluster randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Diarrhoea and growth faltering in early childhood are associated with subsequent adverse outcomes. We aimed to assess whether water quality, sanitation, and handwashing interventions alone or combined with nutrition interventions reduced diarrhoea or growth faltering. METHODS: The WASH Benefits Bangladesh cluster-randomised trial enrolled pregnant women from villages in rural Bangladesh and evaluated outcomes at 1-year and 2-years' follow-up. Pregnant women in geographically adjacent clusters were block-randomised to one of seven clusters: chlorinated drinking water (water); upgraded sanitation (sanitation); promotion of handwashing with soap (handwashing); combined water, sanitation, and handwashing; counselling on appropriate child nutrition plus lipid-based nutrient supplements (nutrition); combined water, sanitation, handwashing, and nutrition; and control (data collection only). Primary outcomes were caregiver-reported diarrhoea in the past 7 days among children who were in utero or younger than 3 years at enrolment and length-for-age Z score among children born to enrolled pregnant women. Masking was not possible for data collection, but analyses were masked. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCC01590095. FINDINGS: Between May 31, 2012, and July 7, 2013, 5551 pregnant women in 720 clusters were randomly allocated to one of seven groups. 1382 women were assigned to the control group; 698 to water; 696 to sanitation; 688 to handwashing; 702 to water, sanitation, and handwashing; 699 to nutrition; and 686 to water, sanitation, handwashing, and nutrition. 331 (6%) women were lost to follow-up. Data on diarrhoea at year 1 or year 2 (combined) were available for 14 425 children (7331 in year 1, 7094 in year 2) and data on length-for-age Z score in year 2 were available for 4584 children (92% of living children were measured at year 2). All interventions had high adherence. Compared with a prevalence of 5·7% (200 of 3517 child weeks) in the control group, 7-day diarrhoea prevalence was lower among index children and children under 3 years at enrolment who received sanitation (61 [3·5%] of 1760; prevalence ratio 0·61, 95% CI 0·46-0·81), handwashing (62 [3·5%] of 1795; 0·60, 0·45-0·80), combined water, sanitation, and handwashing (74 [3·9%] of 1902; 0·69, 0·53-0·90), nutrition (62 [3·5%] of 1766; 0·64, 0·49-0·85), and combined water, sanitation, handwashing, and nutrition (66 [3·5%] of 1861; 0·62, 0·47-0·81); diarrhoea prevalence was not significantly lower in children receiving water treatment (90 [4·9%] of 1824; 0·89, 0·70-1·13). Compared with control (mean length-for-age Z score -1·79), children were taller by year 2 in the nutrition group (mean difference 0·25 [95% CI 0·15-0·36]) and in the combined water, sanitation, handwashing, and nutrition group (0·13 [0·02-0·24]). The individual water, sanitation, and handwashing groups, and combined water, sanitation, and handwashing group had no effect on linear growth. INTERPRETATION: Nutrient supplementation and counselling modestly improved linear growth, but there was no benefit to the integration of water, sanitation, and handwashing with nutrition. Adherence was high in all groups and diarrhoea prevalence was reduced in all intervention groups except water treatment. Combined water, sanitation, and handwashing interventions provided no additive benefit over single interventions. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Pilot of an Elementary School Cough Etiquette Intervention: Acceptability, Feasibility, and Potential for Sustainability.

Schools convene many people together for a prolonged time, facilitating spread of respiratory pathogens and amplifying epidemics. Crowded Bangladeshi schools lack the infrastructure to support optimal cough etiquette behaviors. We collected formative data on current practices from four elementary schools, and developed and piloted a low-cost cough etiquette intervention, promoting coughing and sneezing into upper sleeves at four additional schools. We trained teachers to lead behavior change sessions during regular hygiene classes for 4 weeks. We evaluated intervention acceptability, feasibility, and potential for sustainability at 1 month and at 14 months after the intervention commenced. At baseline, among 63 observed students, 58 (92%) coughed/sneezed into open air, five (8%) covered coughs/sneezes with their hands, which were not subsequently washed with soap and water as they judged this infeasible. After 4 weeks, among 70 observed students, 27 (39%) coughed/sneezed into upper sleeves, 33 (47%) into open air, and 10 (12%) covered with hands. After 14 months, among 230 observed students, 13 (6%) used upper sleeves, 154 (67%) coughed/sneezed into open air, and 59 (26%) covered with hands. Students reported that coughing/sneezing into upper sleeves was simple and protected them and their classmates from germs. This school-based intervention was acceptable and feasible, and resulted in short-term reductions in coughing/sneezing into open air, but these habits of comparatively new behavior were not sustained as teachers ceased behavior change session delivery. Strategies to support longer-term adoption of habits should be considered.

Impact of adding hand-washing and water disinfection promotion to oral cholera vaccination on diarrhoea-associated hospitalization in Dhaka, Bangladesh: evidence from a cluster randomized control trial.

Background: Information on the impact of hygiene interventions on severe outcomes is limited. As a pre-specified secondary outcome of a cluster-randomized controlled trial among >400 000 low-income residents in Dhaka, Bangladesh, we examined the impact of cholera vaccination plus a behaviour change intervention on diarrhoea-associated hospitalization. Methods: Ninety neighbourhood clusters were randomly allocated into three areas: cholera-vaccine-only; vaccine-plus-behaviour-change (promotion of hand-washing with soap plus drinking water chlorination); and control. Study follow-up continued for 2 years after intervention began. We calculated cluster-adjusted diarrhoea-associated hospitalization rates using data we collected from nearby hospitals, and 6-monthly census data of all trial households. Results: A total of 429 995 people contributed 500 700 person-years of data (average follow-up 1.13 years). Vaccine coverage was 58% at the start of analysis but continued to drop due to population migration. In the vaccine-plus-behaviour-change area, water plus soap was present at 45% of hand-washing stations; 4% of households had detectable chlorine in stored drinking water. Hospitalization rates were similar across the study areas [events/1000 person-years, 95% confidence interval (CI), cholera-vaccine-only: 9.4 (95% CI: 8.3-10.6); vaccine-plus-behaviour-change: 9.6 (95% CI: 8.3-11.1); control: 9.7 (95% CI: 8.3-11.6)]. Cholera cases accounted for 7% of total number of diarrhoea-associated hospitalizations. Conclusions: Neither cholera vaccination alone nor cholera vaccination combined with behaviour-change intervention efforts measurably reduced diarrhoea-associated hospitalization in this highly mobile population, during a time when cholera accounted for a small fraction of diarrhoea episodes. Affordable community-level interventions that prevent infection from multiple pathogens by reliably separating faeces from the environment, food and water, with minimal behavioural demands on impoverished communities, remain an important area for research.

Piloting a low-cost hardware intervention to reduce improper disposal of solid waste in communal toilets in low-income settlements in Dhaka, Bangladesh.

BACKGROUND: Bangladesh faces daunting challenges in addressing the sanitation needs of its urban poor. Maintaining the cleanliness and functionality of communal toilets is dependent upon periodic emptying of fecal sludge, and cooperation between users of communal toilets. Trash disposal into latrines can block the outflow pipes, rendering the toilets non-functional. METHODS: Pre-intervention: We conducted in-depth interviews with five operators of fecal sludge emptying equipment and five adult residents who were also caregivers of children. We identified factors contributing to improper disposal of trash into communal toilets, a barrier to operation of the equipment, in low-income communities of Dhaka, Bangladesh. Intervention design: We developed behavior change communication materials to discourage waste disposal in toilets, and promote use of waste bins. We conducted six focus group discussions with adult male, female, landlord and children to select the preferred design for waste bins to be placed inside toilets, and finalize communication materials. Post-intervention: We then pilot-tested an intervention package to promote appropriate trash disposal practices and thus facilitate periodic removal of fecal sludge when the latrine pits become full. We conducted 20 in-depth interviews and four focus group discussions with community residents, landlords and cleaners of communal toilets. RESULTS: Barriers to appropriate waste disposal included lack of private location for disposal of menstrual hygiene products, limited options for formal trash collection and disposal, and the use of plastic bags for disposing children's feces. A pilot intervention including behavior change communication and trash bins was implemented in two urban slum communities. Spot checks confirmed that the bins were in place and used. Respondents described positive improvements in the appearance of the toilet and surrounding environment. CONCLUSION: The current practice on the part of local residents of disposing of waste into toilets impedes the safe removal of fecal sludge and impairs toilet functionality. Residents reported positive changes in toilet cleanliness and usability resulting from this intervention, and this both improves the user experience with toilets, and also promotes the sustainability of the entrepreneurial model of Vacutug operators supported by WSUP.

Behaviour change intervention to improve shared toilet maintenance and cleanliness in urban slums of Dhaka: a cluster-randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: Shared toilets in urban slums are often unclean and poorly maintained, discouraging consistent use and thereby limiting impacts on health and quality of life. We developed behaviour change interventions to support shared toilet maintenance and improve user satisfaction. We report the intervention effectiveness on improving shared toilet cleanliness. METHODS: We conducted a cluster-randomised controlled trial among users of 1226 shared toilets in 23 Dhaka slums. We assessed baseline toilet cleanliness in January 2015. The six-month intervention included provision of hardware (bin for solid waste, 4 l flushing bucket, 70 l water reservoir), and behaviour change communication (compound meetings, interpersonal household sessions, signs depicting rules for toilet use). We estimated the adjusted difference in difference (DID) to assess outcomes and accounted for clustering effects using generalised estimating equations. RESULTS: Compared to controls, intervention toilets were more likely to have water available inside toilet cubicles (DID: +4.7%, 95% CI: 0.2, 9.2), access to brush/broom for cleaning (DID: +8.4%, 95% CI: 2, 15) and waste bins (DID: +63%, 95% CI: 59, 66), while less likely to have visible faeces inside the pan (DID: -13%, 95% CI: -19, -5), the smell of faeces (DID: -7.6%, 95% CI: -14, -1.3) and household waste inside the cubicle (DID: -4%, 95% CI: -7, -1). CONCLUSIONS: In one of few efforts to promote shared toilet cleanliness, intervention compounds were significantly more likely to have cleaner toilets after six months. Future research might explore how residents can self-finance toilet maintenance, or employ mass media to reduce per-capita costs of behaviour change.

Behavioral antecedents for handwashing in a low-income urban setting in Bangladesh: an exploratory study.

BACKGROUND: Health programs commonly promote handwashing by drawing attention to potential fecal contamination in the environment. The underlying assumption is that the thought of fecal contamination will result in disgust, and motivate people to wash their hands with soap. However, this has not proven sufficient to achieve high rates of handwashing with soap at key times. We argue that handwashing with soap is influenced by broader range of antecedents, many unrelated to fecal contamination, that indicate to people when and where to wash their hands. This exploratory study aimed to identify and characterize this broader range of handwashing antecedents for use in future handwashing promotion efforts. METHODS: First, an initial list of behavioral antecedents was elicited through unstructured interviews, focus group discussions and observation with residents, from a low-income community in Dhaka, Bangladesh, who were also recipients of a handwashing intervention. Then, photographs representing three categories of behavioral antecedents were taken: activities of daily living, visual or tactile sensations, and handwashing-related hardware and activities. Finally, the research team conducted ranking exercises with a new set of participants, from the same area, to assess the perceived importance of each antecedent illustrated by the photographs. The research team probed about perceptions regarding how and why that particular antecedent, represented by the photograph, influences handwashing behavior. RESULTS: After coming out of the bathroom and dirt (moyla) on hands were the two antecedents that ranked highest. In all the categories, intervention-related antecedents (three key times for handwashing which included handwashing after coming out of the bathroom, after cleaning a child's anus and before food preparation; intervention provided items that included handwashing station, soapy water bottle, handwashing reminders from posters and community health provider visits) that were being promoted actively in this community were perceived favorably in the qualitative responses, but did not consistently rank higher than non-intervention items. However, many other antecedents were reported to influence when and where people wash their hands: cutting greasy fish, starting a meal, contact with oil and fat stuck to dishes, oil and lice from hair, sweat, unwashed vegetables, reminders from son and daughter or observing others wash hands, and observing the sunset. CONCLUSIONS: Beyond well-recognized antecedents related to fecal contact and dirt on hands, we identified a broader set of antecedents not reported in the literature. Adopting a handwashing promotional strategy to highlight existing antecedents that people themselves have identified as important can help inform the content of an intervention that is more relatable and effective in increasing handwashing practices.

Nonrandomized Trial of Feasibility and Acceptability of Strategies for Promotion of Soapy Water as a Handwashing Agent in Rural Bangladesh.

We conducted a nonrandomized trial of strategies to promote soapy water for handwashing in rural Bangladesh and measured uptake. We enrolled households with children < 3 years for three progressively intensive study arms: promotion of soapy water (N = 120), soapy water promotion plus handwashing stations (N = 103), and soapy water promotion, stations plus detergent refills (N = 90); we also enrolled control households (N = 72). Our handwashing stations included tap-fitted buckets and soapy water bottles. Community promoters visited households and held community meetings to demonstrate soapy water preparation and promote handwashing at key times. Field workers measured uptake 4 months later. In-depth interviews and focus group discussions assessed factors associated with uptake. More households had soapy water at the handwashing place in progressively intensive arms: 18% (promotion), 60% (promotion plus station), and 71% (promotion, station with refills). Compared with the promotion-only arm, more households that received stations had soapy water at the primary handwashing station (44%, P ≤ 0.001; 71%, P < 0.001 with station plus detergent refill). Qualitative findings highlighted several dimensions that affected use: contextual (shared courtyard), psychosocial (perceived value), and technology dimensions (ease of use, convenience). Soapy water may increase habitual handwashing by addressing barriers of cost and availability of handwashing agents near water sources. Further research should inform optimal strategies to scale-up soapy water as a handwashing agent to study health impact.

Hygiene Practices During Food Preparation in Rural Bangladesh: Opportunities to Improve the Impact of Handwashing Interventions.

This study explored the steps of food preparation, related handwashing opportunities, current practices, and community perceptions regarding foods at high-risk of contamination such as mashed foods and salads. In three rural Bangladeshi villages, we collected qualitative and observational data. Food preparation was a complex and multistep process. Food preparation was interrupted by tasks that could contaminate the preparers' hands, after which they continued food preparation without washing hands. Community members typically ate hand-mixed, uncooked mashed food and salad as accompaniments to curry and rice at meals. Hand-mixed dried foods were mostly consumed as a snack. Observers recorded handwashing during preparation of these foods. Among 24 observed caregivers, of 85 opportunities to wash hands with soap during food preparation, washing hands with soap occurred twice, both times after cutting fish, whereas washing hands with water alone was common. A simple and feasible approach is promotion of handwashing with soap upon entering and re-entering the food preparation area, and ensuring that everything needed for handwashing should be within easy reach.

Toward a Scalable and Sustainable Intervention for Complementary Food Safety.

BACKGROUND: Contaminated complementary foods are associated with diarrhea and malnutrition among children aged 6 to 24 months. However, existing complementary food safety intervention models are likely not scalable and sustainable. OBJECTIVE: To understand current behaviors, motivations for these behaviors, and the potential barriers to behavior change and to identify one or two simple actions that can address one or few food contamination pathways and have potential to be sustainably delivered to a larger population. METHODS: Data were collected from 2 rural sites in Bangladesh through semistructured observations (12), video observations (12), in-depth interviews (18), and focus group discussions (3). RESULTS: Although mothers report preparing dedicated foods for children, observations show that these are not separate from family foods. Children are regularly fed store-bought foods that are perceived to be bad for children. Mothers explained that long storage durations, summer temperatures, flies, animals, uncovered food, and unclean utensils are threats to food safety. Covering foods, storing foods on elevated surfaces, and reheating foods before consumption are methods believed to keep food safe. Locally made cabinet-like hardware is perceived to be acceptable solution to address reported food safety threats. CONCLUSION: Conventional approaches that include teaching food safety and highlighting benefits such as reduced contamination may be a disincentive for rural mothers who need solutions for their physical environment. We propose extending existing beneficial behaviors by addressing local preferences of taste and convenience.

Observed practices and perceived advantages of different hand cleansing agents in rural Bangladesh: ash, soil, and soap.

Bangladeshi communities have historically used ash and soil as handwashing agents. A structured observation study and qualitative interviews on the use of ash/soil and soap as handwashing agents were conducted in rural Bangladesh to help develop a handwashing promotion intervention. The observations were conducted among 1,000 randomly selected households from 36 districts. Fieldworkers observed people using ash/soil to wash their hand(s) on 13% of occasions after defecation and on 10% after cleaning a child's anus. This compares with 19% of people who used soap after defecation and 27% after cleaning a child who defecated. Using ash/soil or soap was rarely (< 1%) observed at other times recommended for handwashing. The qualitative study enrolled 24 households from three observation villages, where high usage of ash/soil for handwashing was detected. Most informants reported that ash/soil was used only for handwashing after fecal contact, and that ash/soil could clean hands as effectively as soap.

Handwashing before food preparation and child feeding: a missed opportunity for hygiene promotion.

Enteric diseases are often caused by poor hygiene and can contribute to stunting. From 50 randomly selected villages in Bangladesh, we collected quantitative and qualitative data on handwashing linked to child feeding to integrate handwashing promotion into a young child complementary feeding program. Most participants stated that the community knew the importance of handwashing with soap before food preparation and feeding a child, but had not developed the habit. We observed no handwashing with soap at these key times; sometimes hands were rinsed with water only. Most participants cited the unavailability of soap and water near the cooking place as a barrier to handwashing before food preparation. Most caregivers ranked nurturing messages as the best motivator to encourage handwashing with soap. An integrated intervention should include having soap and water available near the food preparation area and should use nurturing themes to encourage habitual handwashing with soap.

Understanding community perceptions, social norms and current practice related to respiratory infection in Bangladesh during 2009: a qualitative formative study.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory infections are the leading cause of childhood deaths in Bangladesh. Promoting respiratory hygiene may reduce infection transmission. This formative research explored community perceptions about respiratory infections. METHODS: We conducted 34 in-depth interviews and 16 focus group discussions with community members and school children to explore respiratory hygiene related perceptions, practices, and social norms in an urban and a rural setting. We conducted unstructured observations on respiratory hygiene practices in public markets. RESULTS: Informants were not familiar with the term "respiratory infection"; most named diseases that had no relation to respiratory dysfunction. Informants reported that their community identified a number of 'good behaviors' related to respiratory hygiene, but they also noted, and we observed, that very few people practiced these. All informants cited hot/cold weather changes or using cold water as causes for catching cold. They associated transmission of respiratory infections with close contact with a sick person's breath, cough droplets, or spit; sharing a sick person's utensils and food. Informants suggested that avoiding such contact was the most effective method to prevent respiratory infection. Although informants perceived that handwashing after coughing or sneezing might prevent illness, they felt this was not typically feasible or practical. CONCLUSION: Community perceptions of respiratory infections include both concerns with imbalances between hot and cold, and with person-to-person transmission. Many people were aware of measures that could prevent respiratory infection, but did not practice them. Interventions that leverage community understanding of person-to-person transmission and that encourage the practice of their identified 'good behaviors' related to respiratory hygiene may reduce respiratory disease transmission.