Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Key words: Personal hygiene, Sanitation, Hand washing practices, Rural area, Nepal
Introduction:
Inadequate sanitation has direct effect on sanitation4. Worldwide, 5.3% of all deaths and
health of individual, family, 6.8% of all disability are caused by poor
communities and nation as a whole. sanitation, poor hygiene and unsafe water.
Simply, having sanitation facilities Nearly two-thirds (67%) of the total population
increases health well-being and go for open-air defecation and only one-third
economic productivity. Sanitation (33%) having access to a latrine5. The lack of
includes use of latrine, personal hygiene, access to sanitation in Nepal is striking. A total
clean surrounding, proper disposal of of 75% of the population is without access to
solid and liquid wastages and hygienic sanitation, one of the highest proportions in
behavior. Toilet is taken as an essential Asia. However, the urban sanitation coverage is
and basic indicator of health and 75% and the rural sanitation coverage is only
sanitation worldwide 1. Proper sanitation 20%6. Every day, 16 million Nepalese (around
is a necessary prerequisite for 57% of the population) practice open defecation
improvement in general health because they have no toilets7. Access to
standards, productivity of labour force sanitary system, garbage disposal and toilets are
and good quality of life2. Every 20 lowest among the poorest population and is
seconds, a child around the world dies as better in the richer quintiles of the population.
a result of poor sanitation3. About 80% There is huge gap in access to sanitary facilities
of all disease of the developing world is between that available to the poorest population
related to unsafe water and inadequate and the national average8. So this study aims to
Most (65%) of the respondents used soap alone and 4% ash/soil with water for hand
with water after defecation, 31% used water washing (Fig-1).
4%
Soap water
35%
Water only
61% Ash/soil
Most (90%) of the respondents had about sanitation. More than half (58%) of
awareness regarding sanitation as they the houses had satisfactory sanitary
mentioned that due to lack of sanitation condition. Regarding personal hygiene 64%
there is diarrhoeal and other kind of had good and 36% did not have good
diseases. Ten percent didn’t have knowledge personal hygiene (Table 2).
The toilet facilities were seen only in 36% of houses (Fig 3).
36% Yes
64% No
There was significant association between between land and type of family among
education and toilet facilities (P value<0.05) community people (Table 3)
but there was no significant association
Discussion:
stone, soil and leaves for washing hand.2
In this study most (65%) of the respondents Similarly, the study done in Kathmandu,
were using soap water after defecation, and
showed that majority (36%) of the
31% were using water alone and 4% were
households had used soap with water after
using ash/soil water for hand washing. But
defecation9. As hand washing is directly
the study done in Madhyapradesh India
concerned with personal hygiene, it is good
showed that 100% of people did not wash
practice that this community was using soap
their hand after defecation they were using
water 65% after defecation. In this study
64% had good personal hygiene practice and Similarly, the study done by Kravid DZ
36% did not had good personal hygiene and showed that only 5% of villagers used
58% of the houses had good sanitary latrines11. In the study done by Thapa M
condition. Similarly the study done in showed that in most of the rural village,
Madhyapradesh showed that environmental latrines are non-existent. The people used to
sanitation through inhabitants was of an discharge excreta near water sources,
average degree, but not very much making water contaminated12.
satisfactory from the hygiene point of view2.
The present study shows that 90% Conclusion:
awareness about sanitation but the studies The sanitary knowledge 90% and hand
done in Bote community of Pragatinagar
washing with soap water 65% of the
VDC of Nawalparasi district showed that community people was high. The toilet
only 15% of respondents were aware of
facility was low (36%). So, there should be
hygiene. Most of them believe that ghosts extensive health education program for the
spread of diseases10. In this study 64% of the
people of the Katahari VDC about the
houses didn’t had toilet facilities and they personal hygiene and sanitation.
use open defecation. According to Nepal Government and Non-governmental
MDG progress report, around 57% of the organization should be involved in the
population of Nepal practice open construction of toilet in this community with
defecation because they had no toilets.
their full participation.
References: Household Information, Monitoring and
Evaluation System; 2001.
1. Environmental sanitation guidelines, Rural
Village Water Resources Management Project, 6. Patrick Webb. Water and Food Insecurity in
2009. Developing Countries: Major Challenges for the
21st Century [online]. 2005 Oct 20 [cited 2007
2. Dwivedi P, Sharma A. N. A Study on Aug 5]; available from:
Environmental Sanitation, Sanitary URL:http://www.nutrition.tufts.edu/
Habits and Personal Hygiene among the Baigas
of Samnapur Block of Dindori District, Madhya 7. Nepal MDG Progress Report. 2010, GoN and
Pradesh, J. Hum. Ecol 2007;1:7-10. UNDP and CBS, 2009
11. Kravitz JD. The effect of water supply, handling Nepal Journal of Science and Technology. Royal
and usage on water quality in relation to health Nepal; Academy of Science and Technology,
indices in a developing community in South Kathmandu 1999;1:27-33.
Africa. Urban Health News. 1995; 26:32-6.