Skip to main content

Table 3 Questionnaire findings and water quality in the two regions of Burkina Faso, February 2015

From: Prevalence of intestinal parasitic infections and associated risk factors among schoolchildren in the Plateau Central and Centre-Ouest regions of Burkina Faso

Children (n = 385)

[n (%)]

Plateau Central [n (%)]

Centre-Ouest [n (%)]

Selected KAP indicatorsa

Handwashingb

 Before eating

338 (87.8)

164 (82.8)

174 (93.1)

 After eating

55 (14.3)

25 (12.6)

30 (16.0)

 After playing

28 (7.3)

12 (6.1)

16 (8.6)

 After defaecation

85 (22.1)

41 (20.7)

44 (23.5)

 Do not wash hands

16 (4.2)

15 (7.6)

1 (0.5)

 Water only

344 (89.4)

183 (92.4)

161 (86.1)

 Water and soap

306 (79.5)

153 (77.3)

153 (81.8)

 With ash

12 (3.1)

0 (0.0)

12 (6.4)

 With mud

1 (0.3)

0 (0.0)

1 (0.5)

Hygienec

 Lower category (1)

56 (14.6)

33 (16.7)

23 (12.3)

 Middle score (2)

227 (59.0)

119 (60.1)

108 (57.7)

 Best category (3)

102 (26.4)

46 (23.2)

56 (30.0)

Sanitary practices at schoolk

 Using latrines at school

307 (79.7)

181 (91.4)

126 (67.4)

 Open defaecation (fields, bush)

71 (18.5)

12 (6.1)

59 (31.5)

 Using latrines at home/at teachers’ house

7 (1.8)

5 (2.5)

2 (1.1)

Drinking waterd

 Drinking water from school

322 (83.6)

174 (87.9)

148 (79.1)

 Bringing drinking water from home

239 (62.1)

112 (56.6)

127 (67.9)

Quality of water in children’s drinking cups (n = 113)

 Coliform bacteriak

101 (89.4)

46 (80.7)

55 (98.2)

Escherichia coli k

55 (48.7)

17 (29.8)

38 (67.9)

 Faecal streptococci

101 (89.4)

50 (87.7)

51 (91.1)

 Safe to drink without prior treatment

3 (2.7)

3 (5.3)

0 (0.0)

Households (n = 385)

Household WASH characteristicse

Type of latrines used

 Flush toilet (i)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

 VIP latrinef (ii)

14 (3.6)

12 (6.1)

2 (1.1)

 Traditional pit latrine (iii)

83 (21.6)

65 (32.8)

18 (9.6)

 EcoSang (iv)

60 (15.6)

33 (16.7)

27 (14.4)

 Samplat latrine (v)

15 (3.9)

13 (6.6)

2 (1.1)

 No facilities/open defaecation (vi)

213 (55.3)

75 (37.9)

138 (73.8)

 Total improvedh (i, ii, iv, v)

89 (23.1)

58 (29.3)

31 (16.6)

 Total unimprovedi (iii, vi)

296 (76.9)

140 (70.7)

156 (83.4)

Preferred source of drinking water during the rainy season

 Private tab

1 (0.3)

1 (0.5)

0 (0.0)

 Shared tab

1 (0.3)

1 (0.5)

0 (0.0)

 Public tab

25 (6.5)

18 (9.1)

7 (3.7)

 Improved source

4 (1.0)

4 (2.1)

0 (0.0)

 Un-improved source

8 (2.1)

0 (0.0)

8 (4.3)

 Borehole water

249 (64.6)

161 (81.3)

88 (47.1)

 Collected rain water

1 (0.3)

1 (0.5)

0 (0.0)

 Surface water

3 (0.8)

1 (0.5)

2 (1.1)

 Wells

87 (22.6)

14 (7.1)

73 (39.0)

 Others

6 (1.5)

1 (0.5)

5 (2.7)

Preferred source of drinking water during the dry season

 Private tab

1 (0.3)

1 (0.5)

0 (0.0)

 Shared tab

2 (0.5)

2 (1.0)

0 (0.0)

 Public tab

25 (6.5)

18 (9.1)

7 (3.7)

 Improved source

4 (1.0)

0 (0.0)

4 (2.1)

 Un-improved source

9 (2.4)

0 (0.0)

9 (4.8)

 Borehole water

261 (67.8)

168 (84.9)

93 (49.7)

 Surface water

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

 Wells

81 (21.0)

8 (4.0)

73 (39.0)

 Others

2 (0.5)

1 (0.5)

1 (0.5)

Household drinking water storage

 Open

278 (72.2)

141 (71.2)

137 (73.3)

 Pot or canary

290 (75.3)

146 (73.7)

144 (77.0)

 Basin or bowl

16 (4.2)

2 (1.0)

14 (7.5)

 Canister (plastic jerrican)

59 (15.3)

38 (19.2)

21 (11.2)

 Others

18 (4.7)

11 (5.6)

7 (3.7)

 No storage

2 (0.5)

1 (0.5)

1 (0.5)

 Household drinking water treated prior to consumptionjk

69 (17.9)

21 (10.6)

48 (25.7)

Water quality of household drinking water (n = 95)

 Coliform bacteria

89 (93.7)

42 (89.4)

47 (97.9)

Escherichia coli k

61 (64.2)

23 (48.9)

38 (79.2)

 Faecal streptococci

88 (92.6)

42 (89.4)

46 (95.8)

 Safe to drink without prior treatment

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

Water quality of community sources (n = 37)

 Coliform bacteria

13 (35.1)

4 (22.4)

9 (47.4)

Escherichia coli

9 (24.3)

0 (0.0)

9 (47.4)

 Faecal streptococci

10 (27.0)

2 (11.1)

8 (42.1)

 Safe to drink without prior treatment

22 (59.5)

12 (66.7)

10 (52.6)

  1. aKnowledge, attitudes and practices
  2. bMultiple responses were possible for the variables characterising the mode (how) and frequency (when) of handwashing
  3. cA new variable for hygiene behaviour was created using factor analysis with the mode and frequency of handwashing. Children were classified into three categories with poor, middle and good hygiene behaviours
  4. dMultiple responses were possible for the variables characterising the child’s drinking water consumption at school
  5. eWater, sanitation, and hygiene
  6. fVentilated improved pit (VIP) latrine is an improved type of pit latrine, which helps remove odours and prevent flies from breeding and escaping. Excreta are collected in a dry pit which has a vent pipe covered with a fly-proof screen at the top
  7. gEcological sanitation (EcoSan) toilets are linked to a closed system that does not need water. The toilet is based on the principle of safely recycling excreta resources to create a valuable resource for agriculture
  8. hThe improved sanitation category includes all sanitation facilities that hygienically separate human excreta from human contact; i.e. pit latrine with slab, VIP and EcoSan toilets
  9. iThe unimproved sanitation category includes traditional pit latrines and no facilities (open defaecation)
  10. jHouseholds having reported to treat their drinking water through filtration and sedimentation
  11. kSignificant regional differences were found for children’s sanitary practices (dichotomised variable classified as using latrines vs. open defaecation, χ 2 = 4.67, df = 1, P = 0.03), water quality of children’s drinking water cups (coliform bacteria, χ 2 = 5.87, df = 1, P = 0.02; Escherichia coli, χ 2 = 15.51, df = 1, P < 0.001); household water treatment (P = 0.02); and water quality of household drinking water (Escherichia coli, χ 2 = 8.97, df = 7, P = 0.003) using mixed logistic regression models with random intercepts at the level of schools