Shared sanitation versus individual household latrines: a systematic review of health outcomes

More than 761 million people rely on shared sanitation facilities. These have historically been excluded from international sanitation targets, regardless of the service level, due to concerns about acceptability, hygiene and access. In connection with a proposed change in such policy, we undertook...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:PloS one 2014-04, Vol.9 (4), p.e93300
Hauptverfasser: Heijnen, Marieke, Cumming, Oliver, Peletz, Rachel, Chan, Gabrielle Ka-Seen, Brown, Joe, Baker, Kelly, Clasen, Thomas
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 4
container_start_page e93300
container_title PloS one
container_volume 9
creator Heijnen, Marieke
Cumming, Oliver
Peletz, Rachel
Chan, Gabrielle Ka-Seen
Brown, Joe
Baker, Kelly
Clasen, Thomas
description More than 761 million people rely on shared sanitation facilities. These have historically been excluded from international sanitation targets, regardless of the service level, due to concerns about acceptability, hygiene and access. In connection with a proposed change in such policy, we undertook this review to identify and summarize existing evidence that compares health outcomes associated with shared sanitation versus individual household latrines. Shared sanitation included any type of facilities intended for the containment of human faeces and used by more than one household, but excluded public facilities. Health outcomes included diarrhoea, helminth infections, enteric fevers, other faecal-oral diseases, trachoma and adverse maternal or birth outcomes. Studies were included regardless of design, location, language or publication status. Studies were assessed for methodological quality using the STROBE guidelines. Twenty-two studies conducted in 21 countries met the inclusion criteria. Studies show a pattern of increased risk of adverse health outcomes associated with shared sanitation compared to individual household latrines. A meta-analysis of 12 studies reporting on diarrhoea found increased odds of disease associated with reliance on shared sanitation (odds ratio (OR) 1.44, 95% CI: 1.18-1.76). Evidence to date does not support a change of existing policy of excluding shared sanitation from the definition of improved sanitation used in international monitoring and targets. However, such evidence is limited, does not adequately address likely confounding, and does not identify potentially important distinctions among types of shared facilities. As reliance on shared sanitation is increasing, further research is necessary to determine the circumstances, if any, under which shared sanitation can offer a safe, appropriate and acceptable alternative to individual household latrines.
doi_str_mv 10.1371/journal.pone.0093300
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_plos_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_plos_journals_1517442146</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A375582723</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_c9427d24d2934cd3b991d7d94b9507ec</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A375582723</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-42795154663e909d83a72250823b4b3c61ba2ceddf42bb5312e1a6455efd120b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkl2L1DAUhoso7rr6D0QDguDFjPlsGy-EZfFjYGHBVS8NaXI6zdA2s0k7uv_ejNNdpqAguUg4ed43J4c3y54TvCSsIG83fgy9bpdb38MSY8kYxg-yUyIZXeQUs4dH55PsSYwbjAUr8_xxdkJ5wRlj-Wn247rRASyKuneDHpzv0Q5CHCNyvXU7Z0fdosaPERrfWtTqIbge4jukUbyNA3RJY1CAnYOfyNeoAd0ODfLjYHwH8Wn2qNZthGfTfpZ9-_jh68XnxeXVp9XF-eXC5JIOC04LKYjgec5AYmlLpgtKBS4pq3jFTE4qTQ1YW3NaVYIRCkTnXAioLaG4YmfZy4PvtvVRTaOJighScE4JzxOxOhDW643aBtfpcKu8dupPwYe10iH9pQVlZOrHUm6pZNxYVklJbGElr6TABZjk9X56baw6sAb6Ieh2Zjq_6V2j1n6nmJRYkDIZvJoMgr8ZIQ7_aHmi1jp15fraJzPTuWjUOSuEKGlBWaKWf6HSstA5k8JRu1SfCd7MBIkZ4New1mOManX95f_Zq-9z9vURewhC9O24D1Wcg_wAmuBjDFDfT45gtc_23TTUPttqynaSvTie-r3oLszsN50q9IQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1517442146</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Shared sanitation versus individual household latrines: a systematic review of health outcomes</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><source>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</source><creator>Heijnen, Marieke ; Cumming, Oliver ; Peletz, Rachel ; Chan, Gabrielle Ka-Seen ; Brown, Joe ; Baker, Kelly ; Clasen, Thomas</creator><creatorcontrib>Heijnen, Marieke ; Cumming, Oliver ; Peletz, Rachel ; Chan, Gabrielle Ka-Seen ; Brown, Joe ; Baker, Kelly ; Clasen, Thomas</creatorcontrib><description>More than 761 million people rely on shared sanitation facilities. These have historically been excluded from international sanitation targets, regardless of the service level, due to concerns about acceptability, hygiene and access. In connection with a proposed change in such policy, we undertook this review to identify and summarize existing evidence that compares health outcomes associated with shared sanitation versus individual household latrines. Shared sanitation included any type of facilities intended for the containment of human faeces and used by more than one household, but excluded public facilities. Health outcomes included diarrhoea, helminth infections, enteric fevers, other faecal-oral diseases, trachoma and adverse maternal or birth outcomes. Studies were included regardless of design, location, language or publication status. Studies were assessed for methodological quality using the STROBE guidelines. Twenty-two studies conducted in 21 countries met the inclusion criteria. Studies show a pattern of increased risk of adverse health outcomes associated with shared sanitation compared to individual household latrines. A meta-analysis of 12 studies reporting on diarrhoea found increased odds of disease associated with reliance on shared sanitation (odds ratio (OR) 1.44, 95% CI: 1.18-1.76). Evidence to date does not support a change of existing policy of excluding shared sanitation from the definition of improved sanitation used in international monitoring and targets. However, such evidence is limited, does not adequately address likely confounding, and does not identify potentially important distinctions among types of shared facilities. As reliance on shared sanitation is increasing, further research is necessary to determine the circumstances, if any, under which shared sanitation can offer a safe, appropriate and acceptable alternative to individual household latrines.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0093300</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24743336</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Public Library of Science</publisher><subject>Acceptability ; Containment ; Developing countries ; Diarrhea ; Environmental health ; Epidemics ; Epidemiology ; Health aspects ; Health risks ; Health Status ; Historical account ; Households ; Housing ; Humans ; Hygiene ; Infectious diseases ; International conferences ; Latrines ; Low income groups ; Maternal &amp; child health ; Medicine ; Medicine and Health Sciences ; Mortality ; Privacy ; Public health ; Quality assessment ; Research and Analysis Methods ; Risk factors ; Sanitation ; Sanitation - methods ; Sanitation facilities ; Studies ; Toilet Facilities ; Trachoma ; Tropical diseases ; Water shortages ; Water supply</subject><ispartof>PloS one, 2014-04, Vol.9 (4), p.e93300</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2014 Public Library of Science</rights><rights>2014 Heijnen et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2014 Heijnen et al 2014 Heijnen et al</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-42795154663e909d83a72250823b4b3c61ba2ceddf42bb5312e1a6455efd120b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-42795154663e909d83a72250823b4b3c61ba2ceddf42bb5312e1a6455efd120b3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3990518/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3990518/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,860,881,2096,2915,23845,27901,27902,53766,53768,79342,79343</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24743336$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Heijnen, Marieke</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cumming, Oliver</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Peletz, Rachel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chan, Gabrielle Ka-Seen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brown, Joe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Baker, Kelly</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Clasen, Thomas</creatorcontrib><title>Shared sanitation versus individual household latrines: a systematic review of health outcomes</title><title>PloS one</title><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><description>More than 761 million people rely on shared sanitation facilities. These have historically been excluded from international sanitation targets, regardless of the service level, due to concerns about acceptability, hygiene and access. In connection with a proposed change in such policy, we undertook this review to identify and summarize existing evidence that compares health outcomes associated with shared sanitation versus individual household latrines. Shared sanitation included any type of facilities intended for the containment of human faeces and used by more than one household, but excluded public facilities. Health outcomes included diarrhoea, helminth infections, enteric fevers, other faecal-oral diseases, trachoma and adverse maternal or birth outcomes. Studies were included regardless of design, location, language or publication status. Studies were assessed for methodological quality using the STROBE guidelines. Twenty-two studies conducted in 21 countries met the inclusion criteria. Studies show a pattern of increased risk of adverse health outcomes associated with shared sanitation compared to individual household latrines. A meta-analysis of 12 studies reporting on diarrhoea found increased odds of disease associated with reliance on shared sanitation (odds ratio (OR) 1.44, 95% CI: 1.18-1.76). Evidence to date does not support a change of existing policy of excluding shared sanitation from the definition of improved sanitation used in international monitoring and targets. However, such evidence is limited, does not adequately address likely confounding, and does not identify potentially important distinctions among types of shared facilities. As reliance on shared sanitation is increasing, further research is necessary to determine the circumstances, if any, under which shared sanitation can offer a safe, appropriate and acceptable alternative to individual household latrines.</description><subject>Acceptability</subject><subject>Containment</subject><subject>Developing countries</subject><subject>Diarrhea</subject><subject>Environmental health</subject><subject>Epidemics</subject><subject>Epidemiology</subject><subject>Health aspects</subject><subject>Health risks</subject><subject>Health Status</subject><subject>Historical account</subject><subject>Households</subject><subject>Housing</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Hygiene</subject><subject>Infectious diseases</subject><subject>International conferences</subject><subject>Latrines</subject><subject>Low income groups</subject><subject>Maternal &amp; child health</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine and Health Sciences</subject><subject>Mortality</subject><subject>Privacy</subject><subject>Public health</subject><subject>Quality assessment</subject><subject>Research and Analysis Methods</subject><subject>Risk factors</subject><subject>Sanitation</subject><subject>Sanitation - methods</subject><subject>Sanitation facilities</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Toilet Facilities</subject><subject>Trachoma</subject><subject>Tropical diseases</subject><subject>Water shortages</subject><subject>Water supply</subject><issn>1932-6203</issn><issn>1932-6203</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkl2L1DAUhoso7rr6D0QDguDFjPlsGy-EZfFjYGHBVS8NaXI6zdA2s0k7uv_ejNNdpqAguUg4ed43J4c3y54TvCSsIG83fgy9bpdb38MSY8kYxg-yUyIZXeQUs4dH55PsSYwbjAUr8_xxdkJ5wRlj-Wn247rRASyKuneDHpzv0Q5CHCNyvXU7Z0fdosaPERrfWtTqIbge4jukUbyNA3RJY1CAnYOfyNeoAd0ODfLjYHwH8Wn2qNZthGfTfpZ9-_jh68XnxeXVp9XF-eXC5JIOC04LKYjgec5AYmlLpgtKBS4pq3jFTE4qTQ1YW3NaVYIRCkTnXAioLaG4YmfZy4PvtvVRTaOJighScE4JzxOxOhDW643aBtfpcKu8dupPwYe10iH9pQVlZOrHUm6pZNxYVklJbGElr6TABZjk9X56baw6sAb6Ieh2Zjq_6V2j1n6nmJRYkDIZvJoMgr8ZIQ7_aHmi1jp15fraJzPTuWjUOSuEKGlBWaKWf6HSstA5k8JRu1SfCd7MBIkZ4New1mOManX95f_Zq-9z9vURewhC9O24D1Wcg_wAmuBjDFDfT45gtc_23TTUPttqynaSvTie-r3oLszsN50q9IQ</recordid><startdate>20140401</startdate><enddate>20140401</enddate><creator>Heijnen, Marieke</creator><creator>Cumming, Oliver</creator><creator>Peletz, Rachel</creator><creator>Chan, Gabrielle Ka-Seen</creator><creator>Brown, Joe</creator><creator>Baker, Kelly</creator><creator>Clasen, Thomas</creator><general>Public Library of Science</general><general>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>IOV</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140401</creationdate><title>Shared sanitation versus individual household latrines: a systematic review of health outcomes</title><author>Heijnen, Marieke ; Cumming, Oliver ; Peletz, Rachel ; Chan, Gabrielle Ka-Seen ; Brown, Joe ; Baker, Kelly ; Clasen, Thomas</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-42795154663e909d83a72250823b4b3c61ba2ceddf42bb5312e1a6455efd120b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Acceptability</topic><topic>Containment</topic><topic>Developing countries</topic><topic>Diarrhea</topic><topic>Environmental health</topic><topic>Epidemics</topic><topic>Epidemiology</topic><topic>Health aspects</topic><topic>Health risks</topic><topic>Health Status</topic><topic>Historical account</topic><topic>Households</topic><topic>Housing</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Hygiene</topic><topic>Infectious diseases</topic><topic>International conferences</topic><topic>Latrines</topic><topic>Low income groups</topic><topic>Maternal &amp; child health</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine and Health Sciences</topic><topic>Mortality</topic><topic>Privacy</topic><topic>Public health</topic><topic>Quality assessment</topic><topic>Research and Analysis Methods</topic><topic>Risk factors</topic><topic>Sanitation</topic><topic>Sanitation - methods</topic><topic>Sanitation facilities</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Toilet Facilities</topic><topic>Trachoma</topic><topic>Tropical diseases</topic><topic>Water shortages</topic><topic>Water supply</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Heijnen, Marieke</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cumming, Oliver</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Peletz, Rachel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chan, Gabrielle Ka-Seen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brown, Joe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Baker, Kelly</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Clasen, Thomas</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science &amp; Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Heijnen, Marieke</au><au>Cumming, Oliver</au><au>Peletz, Rachel</au><au>Chan, Gabrielle Ka-Seen</au><au>Brown, Joe</au><au>Baker, Kelly</au><au>Clasen, Thomas</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Shared sanitation versus individual household latrines: a systematic review of health outcomes</atitle><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><date>2014-04-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>9</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>e93300</spage><pages>e93300-</pages><issn>1932-6203</issn><eissn>1932-6203</eissn><abstract>More than 761 million people rely on shared sanitation facilities. These have historically been excluded from international sanitation targets, regardless of the service level, due to concerns about acceptability, hygiene and access. In connection with a proposed change in such policy, we undertook this review to identify and summarize existing evidence that compares health outcomes associated with shared sanitation versus individual household latrines. Shared sanitation included any type of facilities intended for the containment of human faeces and used by more than one household, but excluded public facilities. Health outcomes included diarrhoea, helminth infections, enteric fevers, other faecal-oral diseases, trachoma and adverse maternal or birth outcomes. Studies were included regardless of design, location, language or publication status. Studies were assessed for methodological quality using the STROBE guidelines. Twenty-two studies conducted in 21 countries met the inclusion criteria. Studies show a pattern of increased risk of adverse health outcomes associated with shared sanitation compared to individual household latrines. A meta-analysis of 12 studies reporting on diarrhoea found increased odds of disease associated with reliance on shared sanitation (odds ratio (OR) 1.44, 95% CI: 1.18-1.76). Evidence to date does not support a change of existing policy of excluding shared sanitation from the definition of improved sanitation used in international monitoring and targets. However, such evidence is limited, does not adequately address likely confounding, and does not identify potentially important distinctions among types of shared facilities. As reliance on shared sanitation is increasing, further research is necessary to determine the circumstances, if any, under which shared sanitation can offer a safe, appropriate and acceptable alternative to individual household latrines.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Public Library of Science</pub><pmid>24743336</pmid><doi>10.1371/journal.pone.0093300</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1932-6203
ispartof PloS one, 2014-04, Vol.9 (4), p.e93300
issn 1932-6203
1932-6203
language eng
recordid cdi_plos_journals_1517442146
source MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry; Public Library of Science (PLoS)
subjects Acceptability
Containment
Developing countries
Diarrhea
Environmental health
Epidemics
Epidemiology
Health aspects
Health risks
Health Status
Historical account
Households
Housing
Humans
Hygiene
Infectious diseases
International conferences
Latrines
Low income groups
Maternal & child health
Medicine
Medicine and Health Sciences
Mortality
Privacy
Public health
Quality assessment
Research and Analysis Methods
Risk factors
Sanitation
Sanitation - methods
Sanitation facilities
Studies
Toilet Facilities
Trachoma
Tropical diseases
Water shortages
Water supply
title Shared sanitation versus individual household latrines: a systematic review of health outcomes
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-09T05%3A48%3A20IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_plos_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Shared%20sanitation%20versus%20individual%20household%20latrines:%20a%20systematic%20review%20of%20health%20outcomes&rft.jtitle=PloS%20one&rft.au=Heijnen,%20Marieke&rft.date=2014-04-01&rft.volume=9&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=e93300&rft.pages=e93300-&rft.issn=1932-6203&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0093300&rft_dat=%3Cgale_plos_%3EA375582723%3C/gale_plos_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1517442146&rft_id=info:pmid/24743336&rft_galeid=A375582723&rft_doaj_id=oai_doaj_org_article_c9427d24d2934cd3b991d7d94b9507ec&rfr_iscdi=true