TABLE 3.

Performance of Latrines on Transmission Pathways by Type of Latrine

Presence of Feces Around Pit-HolePresence of Flies Around Pit-HoleNumber of Flies
Presence of Study-Unimproved LatrineA Study-Improved LatrinePresence of Study-Unimproved LatrineA Study-Improved LatrinePresence of Study-Unimproved LatrineA Study-Improved Latrine
AllaOR (95% CI)1.0 (reference)0.50 (0.33, 0.75)1.0 (reference)0.05 (0.03, 0.10)1.0 (references)–0.35 (–0.40, –0.29)
P-value.001<.001<.001
3 months, June 2016a% (n/N)241/66027/102
%36.5%26.5%
aOR (95% CI)0.60 (0.04−8.67)
P-value.71
9 months, December 2016% (n/N)23.4 (153/655)19.0 (19/127)83.5 (545/653)48.4 (61/126)10.6 (0.6)2.1 (0.4)
Mean (SD)10.6 (0.6)2.1 (0.4)
aOR (95% CI)0.45 (0.16, 1.24)0.05 (0.01, 0.30)–0.34 (–0.42, –0.27)
P-value.12.001<.001
10 months, January 2017% (n/N)22.6 (149/658)8.4 (14/166)83.0 (546/658)32.5 (54/166)
Mean (SD)6.9 (0.3)1.5 (0.3)
aOR (95% CI)0.25 (0.06, 0.94)0.16 (0.11, 0.23)–0.41 (–0.49, –0.34)
P-value.04<.001<.001
  • Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; aOR, adjusted odds ratio; SD, standard deviation.

  • a Blanks in some column in June: flies were not counted.