Browsing by Author "Chidziwisano K"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3

Experiences of capacity strengthening in sanitation and hygiene research in Africa and Asia: the SHARE Research Consortium.
(2019-Aug-05) Torondel B; Balls E; Chisenga CC; Kumwenda S; Okello E; Simiyu S; Morse T; Smith K; Mumma J; Banzi J; Harvey E; Chidziwisano K; Chipungu J; Grosskurth H; Beda A; Kapiga S; EstevesMills J; Cumming O; Cairncross S; Chilengi R; Centre for Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Appropriate Technology Development, University of Malawi - The Polytechnic, Blantyre, Malawi.; Center for Infectious Disease Research in Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia.; Department of Disease Control, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London, WC1E 7HT, United Kingdom.; WaterAid Tanzania, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.; Mwanza Intervention Trials Unit, Mwanza, Tanzania.; Department of Disease Control, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London, WC1E 7HT, United Kingdom. belen.torondel@lshtm.ac.uk.; WaterAid, London, United Kingdom.; Great Lakes University of Kisumu, Kisumu, Kenya.; CIDRZ; Centre for Infectious Disease Research in Zambia (CIDRZ)
The Sanitation and Hygiene Applied Research for Equity (SHARE) Research Programme consortium is a programme funded by the United Kingdom Department for International Development (DFID) that aims to contribute to achieving universal access to effective, sustainable, and equitable sanitation and hygiene worldwide. The capacity development component is an important pillar for this programme and different strategies were designed and implemented during the various phases of SHARE. This paper describes and reflects on the capacity-building strategies of this large multi-country research consortium, identifying lessons learnt and proposing recommendations for future global health research programmes. In the first phase, the strategy focused on increasing the capacity of individuals and institutions from low- and middle-income countries in conducting their own research. SHARE supported six PhD students and 25 MSc students, and organised a wide range of training events for different stakeholders. SHARE peer-reviewed all proposals that researchers submitted through several rounds of funding and offered external peer-review for all the reports produced under the partner's research platforms. In the second phase, the aim was to support capacity development of a smaller number of African research institutions to move towards their independent sustainability, with a stronger focus on early and mid-career scientists within these institutions. In each institution, a Research Fellow was supported and a specific capacity development plan was jointly developed.Strategies that yielded success were learning by doing (supporting institutions and postgraduate students on sanitation and hygiene research), providing fellowships to appoint mid-career scientists to support personal and institutional development, and supporting tailored capacity-building plans. The key lessons learnt were that research capacity-building programmes need to be driven by local initiatives tailored with support from partners. We recommend that future programmes seeking to strengthen research capacity should consider targeted strategies for individuals at early, middle and later career stages and should be sensitive to other institutional operations to support both the research and management capacities.
Recommendations for hand hygiene in community settings: a scoping review of current international guidelines.
(2023-Jun-21) MacLeod C; Braun L; Caruso BA; Chase C; Chidziwisano K; Chipungu J; Dreibelbis R; Ejemot-Nwadiaro R; Gordon B; Esteves Mills J; Cumming O; Department of Disease Control, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine Faculty of Infectious and Tropical Diseases, London, UK.; Hubert Department of Global Health, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.; Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Health Unit, WHO, Geneva, Switzerland.; Water and Sanitation Program, World Bank Group, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.; Social and Behavioural Science Department, Center for Infectious Disease Research in Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia.; Department of Public Health, College of Medical Sciences, University of Calabar, Calabar, Nigeria.; Department of Environmental Health and WASHTED, Malawi University of Business and Applied Sciences, Blantyre, Malawi.; Department of Disease Control, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine Faculty of Infectious and Tropical Diseases, London, UK clara.macleod@lshtm.ac.uk.; CIDRZ; Centre for Infectious Disease Research in Zambia (CIDRZ)
BACKGROUND: Hand hygiene is an important measure to prevent disease transmission. OBJECTIVE: To summarise current international guideline recommendations for hand hygiene in community settings and to assess to what extent they are consistent and evidence based. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included international guidelines with one or more recommendations on hand hygiene in community settings-categorised as domestic, public or institutional-published by international organisations, in English or French, between 1 January 1990 and 15 November 2021. DATA SOURCES: To identify relevant guidelines, we searched the WHO Institutional Repository for Information Sharing Database, Google, websites of international organisations, and contacted expert organisations and individuals. CHARTING METHODS: Recommendations were mapped to four areas related to hand hygiene: (1) effective hand hygiene; (2) minimum requirements; (3) behaviour change and (4) government measures. Recommendations were assessed for consistency, concordance and whether supported by evidence. RESULTS: We identified 51 guidelines containing 923 recommendations published between 1999 and 2021 by multilateral agencies and international non-governmental organisations. Handwashing with soap is consistently recommended as the preferred method for hand hygiene across all community settings. Most guidelines specifically recommend handwashing with plain soap and running water for at least 20 s; single-use paper towels for hand drying; and alcohol-based hand rub (ABHR) as a complement or alternative to handwashing. There are inconsistent and discordant recommendations for water quality for handwashing, affordable and effective alternatives to soap and ABHR, and the design of handwashing stations. There are gaps in recommendations on soap and water quantity, behaviour change approaches and government measures required for effective hand hygiene. Less than 10% of recommendations are supported by any cited evidence. CONCLUSION: While current international guidelines consistently recommend handwashing with soap across community settings, there remain gaps in recommendations where clear evidence-based guidance might support more effective policy and investment.
WASH and learn: a scoping review of health, education and gender equity outcomes of school-based water, sanitation and hygiene in low-income and middle-income countries.
(2025-May-06) Bick S; Davies K; Mwenge M; MacLeod C; Braun L; Chipungu J; Chidziwisano K; Dreibelbis R; WASHTED Centre, Malawi University of Business and Applied Sciences, Blantyre, Malawi.; Centre for Infectious Disease Research in Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia.; Department of Disease Control, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.; Department of Disease Control, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK Robert.Dreibelbis@lshtm.ac.uk.; CIDRZ; Centre for Infectious Disease Research in Zambia (CIDRZ)
School-age children in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) face health and educational challenges due to inadequate water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) in schools (WinS). Evidence for the impact of WinS interventions is limited and inconsistent, and previous systematic reviews have faced challenges in synthesising data due to varied interventions, study designs and outcome measures, although most do not examine this variability in more detail. This scoping review identified 83 experimental studies from 33 LMICs measuring a primary or secondary health or educational outcome among pupils, published up to November 2023, using a systematic search of seven databases and searching of reference lists of previous systematic reviews and included articles. These included 65 studies (78%) not included in previous WinS reviews and encompassed 313 intervention effects across 14 outcome domains. Interventions comprised an array of WASH technologies and approaches, often combining infrastructure and behaviour change methods and frequently integrated with other school-based initiatives like deworming. 36 studies (43%) measured only behavioural or knowledge outcomes. Our comprehensive inventory of study outcomes identified 158 unique outcome measures, with 72% measured in exactly one study. Common outcomes included parasitic infections, anthropometric measures and school absence, but approaches to measurement varied widely even for similar outcomes. Only 7% of results were disaggregated by gender, limiting assessment of differential impacts. Our findings underscore the need for standardised outcome measures in WinS research incorporating a complete definition of the assessment and aggregation approach, greater attention to gender-specific impacts, and further exploration of modalities and functions of WinS interventions alongside novel meta-analysis methods to disentangle effects of diverse intervention components.