Impact Of India Mark II Hand Pump Water Utilization And Sanitary Practices On Prevalence Of Water Borne Illnesses Among Under Five

Children

Ra.Pirabu1, J.V.Singh2, M.Agarwal3, J.Masood4, V.K.Singh5, M.K.Mannar5

1-Junior Resident, 2-Professor, 3-Associate Professor, 4-Assistant Professor,5-LecturerDepartment of Community Medicine and Public Health, CSMMU UP, Lucknow

Introduction• Approximately 88% of diarrhoeal diseases are attributed to

unsafe water supply and inadequate sanitation and hygiene.

• 1972-73: Accelerated Rural Water Supply Programme (ARWSP) was introduced by the GOI to assist states and union territories to accelerate the pace of coverage of safe drinking water supply.

• India Mark II Hand pumps were introduced during the year 1975-76 for satisfying the need for a sturdy deep borewell hand pumps where in the water level is low below the hard rock shield or the impervious layer.

Objectives• To study the availability and utilization of water facilities

from India mark II hand pump.• To assess the practices followed by the people in relation to

safe water facilities.• To compare the prevalence of water borne illnesses in the

under five children of those households utilizing India mark II hand pumps with those who are not utilizing.

Materials and Methods• Study Population- Rural areas of Lucknow district• Study period- 1 year between Oct-09 to Sep-10• Study design- cross-sectional community based field study• Sampling units- Primary, secondary and tertiary units were the

Community development blocks, villages and households respectively

• Sample size- 303 Households including 488 under five children• Sampling technique- Multistage random sampling– 1st stage: 2 community blocks amongst the 8 blocks were selected

using simple random sampling– 2nd stage: 20% of villages among the 150 villages distributed in the

2 blocks were selected using simple random sampling– 3rd stage: Households were selected using systematic random

sampling with a random start

Materials and Methods cont..• Inclusion criteria- Any adult member of the household

present at the time of survey and who responded. The members of the household should be residing in that house for a minimum period of six months. The household should have at least one child aged less than five years old present at the time of survey.

• Exclusion criteria- Those members who didn’t respond and cooperate were not included in the study. The children of household members who stayed away from their normal dwelling place for a period of six months.

ObservationsTable 1: Sources of drinking water in the surveyed households (N= 303)

Source Of WaterHouseholds

Number Percentage

Shallow hand pump 71 23.4

India mark II hand pump 202 66.7

Submersible pump with motor

25 8.3

Protected dug well 1 0.3

Unprotected dug well 4 1.3

Table 2: Water storage and Purification Practices adopted by the households (N=303)

PracticesHouseholds

Number PercentageStorage of drinking

waterYes ( Buckets/ Pots) 210 69.3

No 93 30.7Covering of utensil

used for storing drinking water*

Yes 140 66.7

No 70 33.3

Treatment of water before drinking

Yes 10 3.3No 293 96.7

*n= 210

Table 3: Prevalence of water borne illnesses in children with respect to the water source utilized in their households. (N= 488)

Water borne illnessSource of Drinking water

TotalIndia Mark II Others

Diarrhoea

Yes 213 (72.2){59.8} 82 (27.8){62.1} 295 {60.5}

No 143 (74.1){40.2} 50 (25.9){37.9} 193 {39.5}

χ2: 0.211 df: 1 p value: 0.645

Dysentery

Yes 7 (70.0){2.0} 3 (30.0){2.3} 10 {2.0}

No 349 (73.0){98.0} 129 (27.0){97.7} 478 {98.0}

χ2: 0.045 df: 1 p value: 0.832

Worm

infestation

Yes 18 (60.0){5.1} 12 (40.0){9.1} 30 {6.1}

No 338 (73.8){94.9} 120 (26.2){90.9} 458 {93.9}

χ2: 2.717 df: 1 p value: 0.099

Table 4: Multinomial logit regression analysis of predictors influencing the prevalence of water borne illnesses in under five children

Predictors B Sig. OR95% Confidence Interval

Lower Bound Upper Bound

Diarrhoea

Intercept -12.605 .000

India Mark II .105 .750 1.110 .584 2.111

Others 0b . . . .Dysentery

Intercept -71.030 .987

India Mark II -2.770 .021 .063 .006 .659

Others 0c . . . .Worm Infestation

Intercept 13.428 .000

India Mark II -2.009 .003 .134 .035 .514

Others 0c . . . .

Conclusions• 75% households derived drinking water from India Mark II hand

pumps. • Two third stored and covered drinking water. 96.7% households

didn’t treat water before drinking. • Diarrhoea prevalence in children utilizing India mark II hand pumps

was less (59.8%) than those using other sources (62.1%). • Prevalence of dysentery was significantly related to the source of

water supply• The odd of getting dysentery or infested with worm are 0.06 and 0.13

times less likely to occur in children utilising India mark II hand pump respectively whereas diarrhoea is 1.1 times more likely to occur in children utilising India mark II hand pump.

Thank You