Menstrual hygiene management and school absenteeism among adolescent students in Indonesia : evidence from a cross-sectional school-based survey

Objective To assess the prevalence of menstrual hygiene management (MHM) knowledge and practices among adolescent schoolgirls in Indonesia, and assess factors associated with poor MHM and school absenteeism due to menstruation. Methods A cross-sectional survey enrolled a representative sample of urban and rural school-going girls aged 12-19 years in four provinces of Indonesia. A semi-structured, self-administered questionnaire obtained socio-demographic characteristics, knowledge, practices and attitudes related to menstruation, MHM and school absenteeism. School water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) facilities were also assessed. Univariate weighted population prevalence was estimated and multivariable logit regression analyses applied to explore associations. Results A total of 1159 adolescent girls with a mean age of 15 years (SD = 1.8) participated. Most girls (90.8%, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) = 79.7-96.1) had reached menarche. Over half (64.1%, 95% CI = 49.9-76.2) reported poor MHM practices, and 11.1% (95% CI = 8.1-15.2) had missed one or more days of school during their most recent menstrual period. Poor MHM practices were associated with rural residence (Adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 1.73, 95% CI = 1.13-2.64), province (various AOR), lower school grade (AOR = 1.69, 95% CI = 1.05-2.74) and low knowledge of menstruation (AOR = 3.49, 95% CI = 1.61-7.58). Absenteeism was associated with living in rural areas (AOR = 3.96, 95% CI = 3.02-5.18), province (various AOR), higher school grade (AOR = 3.02, 95% CI = 2.08-4.38), believing menstruation should be kept secret (AOR = 1.47, 95% CI = 1.03-2.11), experiencing serious menstrual pain (AOR = 1.68, 95% CI = 1.06-2.68) and showed mixed associations with school WASH facilities. Conclusions High prevalence of poor MHM and considerable school absenteeism due to menstruation among Indonesian girls highlight the need for improved interventions that reach girls at a young age and address knowledge, shame and secrecy, acceptability of WASH infrastructure and menstrual pain management

Promoting latrine construction and use in rural villages practicing open defecation: process evaluation in connection with a randomised controlled trial in Orissa, India.

BACKGROUND: Our group conducted a cluster-randomised trial in 100 villages of Orissa, India to measure the impact of a rural sanitation intervention implemented under the government of India's Total Sanitation Campaign, on diarrhoea and soil-transmitted helminth infections. This paper reports on a process evaluation conducted in the context of the trial. METHODS: Process evaluation data were collected through review of key documentation, quantitative surveys, direct observations, and semi-structured interviews with staff from implementing NGOs and community members. Between March 2011 and March 2012, trained enumerators recorded observations on latrine construction status every 6-8 weeks in the 50 intervention villages and noted activities reported to have taken place based on NGO staff interviews and review of NGO records. A survey among 10% of households in intervention and control villages was conducted to compare levels of awareness of key intervention components. In addition, 10% of village water and sanitation committee (VWSC) members were interviewed to measure their level of involvement in the intervention delivery. RESULTS: The percentage of households with a latrine (completed or under construction) increased from 8% at baseline to 66% one year after the start of the intervention in March 2012. Almost none of the intervention households recall any form of participatory community-level activities at the start of the programme, although intervention households were generally more aware of the Total Sanitation Campaign (91% versus 49%, p < 0.001), VWSCs (51% versus 9%, p < 0.001), adolescent girls groups (23% versus 8%, p < 0.01), wall paintings (44% versus 7%, p < 0.001) and were more likely to report a household visit on sanitation during the past three months (65% versus 3%, p < 0.001). We found no strong evidence of an association between levels of awareness of or participation in mobilisation activities and levels of latrine coverage in intervention villages. CONCLUSIONS: The levels of coverage achieved and the levels of awareness of the mobilisation process in our intervention villages were lower than planned, but similar to those reported elsewhere in India under the TSC. Our process evaluation highlights important gaps between the TSC guidelines and their implementation on the ground. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Number on clinicaltrial.gov: NCT01214785