Assessing the implications of access to toilet and water facilities on the health of households in the Sunyani Municipality, Ghana

Introduction

Access to adequate sanitation and clean water is fundamental for societal progress, serving as a benchmark for civilization in modern society. However, despite global initiatives, significant portions of the global population still lack improved sanitation and access to clean water sources, perpetuating health risks and impeding societal advancement (1–3). An estimated 2.4 billion people still lack access to improved sanitation and 946 million still practice open defecation (4). It is estimated that 2.7 billion people use on-site sanitation worldwide and 1.77 billion use some kind of a pit latrine (5). Of those using some form of pit latrines, 65% of them are found in Sub-Saharan Africa (6). With access to potable drinking water globally, approximately 2 billion people continue to drink water contaminated with faeces (7).

Improved sanitation is measured by toilets with water-based architecture that flush into sewers and other septic systems, or pit latrines which can be simple pit latrines or pit latrines with improved ventilation (8). Latrines are excreta disposal facilities that can safely separate human excreta from human and insect contact (9).

Diseases attributable to inadequate water, sanitation and hygiene account for more than 4% of all disease burdens and deaths (4,10). Evidence from literature strongly shows the reduction in diarrhoea morbidity and subsequent mortality with such improved sanitation (11,12).

The relationship between water, sanitation, hygiene and public health has gained much prominence within public health circles across the globe. Per epidemiological and medical studies, the lack of sanitary toilets which is a key feature in developing countries exacerbates the transmission of bacteria especially Salmonella and Escherichia coli which invariably increases the onset of worms, malaria and other diarrhoeal infections (5).

Within the context of Ghana, substantial challenges persist in ensuring widespread access to safe water and improved sanitation. A majority of Ghanaians do not have access to toilet facilities in their homes and compounds (13). Open defecation is reported to be practiced by 15.2% of Ghanaian households (14). The availability and usage of public toilets remain the only alternatives to open defecation for a significant number of people in many low-income, urban communities (15). Ghana remains the country with the highest reliance on shared sanitation facilities globally (15).

Conspicuously, the Sunyani Municipality in the Bono region grapples with alarming deficiencies in these vital facilities, posing severe health risks to its residents (16). High rates of households lacking access to adequate toilets within their homes or compounds, coupled with prevalent open defecation practices, amplify health threats, particularly affecting vulnerable populations, such as children under five years old (16).

Despite Sunyani’s burgeoning urbanization, a noticeable gap exists in the literature regarding the direct relationship between inadequate access to improved toilet facilities and clean water sources and the resultant health implications for residents.

The Sunyani Municipality faces a pressing concern of inadequate access to improved toilet facilities and safe water sources, which significantly impact the health and well-being of its residents. The absence of detailed studies examining the direct correlations between these facilities and health outcomes within this rapidly growing urban area underscores the urgency of this research. Understanding the precise implications of inadequate sanitation and unsafe water on household health is essential for designing targeted interventions and policy frameworks aimed at ameliorating these challenges and ensuring a healthier living environment for Sunyani’s population. This research aims to address this critical gap by comprehensively assessing the multifaceted implications of water and toilet facilities on household health within the Sunyani municipality of Ghana.

In Ghana, 12.7% of households drink unsafe water and 80.6% use unimproved toilet facilities, with 18.8% resorting to open defecation (Ghana Statistical Service (GSS), Ghana Health Service (GHS) and ICF, 2018). A majority of Ghanaians do not have access to toilet facilities in their homes and compounds (13). According to Armah-Attoh (2015), approximately 9% of Ghanaians say they do not have access to toilet facilities. Availability and access to potable drinking water and improved sanitation are therefore of utmost significance to health and well-being (14). Open defecation is reported to be practiced by 15.2% of Ghanaian households (14). The availability and usage of public toilets remain the only alternatives to open defecation for a significant number of people in many low-income, urban communities (15). Ghana remains the country with the highest reliance on shared sanitation facilities globally (15).

Diarrhoeal diseases emanating from drinking contaminated water is one of the most common illnesses reported from health facilities in Ghana (14). Approximately, a quarter of all mortalities recorded among under 5 year old children in Ghana are attributable to diarrhoea (18). Sunyani, located in the then Brong Ahafo region has been reported to be one of the fastest growing cities in Ghana (16). According to the Afrobarometer data, the proportion of the population without access to toilets inside their homes or compounds in the Brong Ahafo region stood at 80% (13). This is relatively higher. The prevalence of open defecation among households in the Brong Ahafo region is estimated as 14.2% (14). As with any growing city in most developing countries, Sunyani municipality has its fair share of inadequate access to potable water and improved sanitation and its implication on health. There is a paucity of published work, however, on the implication to access to improved toilet facilities and potable water on the health of residents in the Sunyani municipality. This therefore, necessitated the need to assess the implications of water and toilet facilities on the health of households within the Sunyani municipality of Ghana.

Methodology

Results

Analysis on coordinates of toilet and water using GPS

As part of the research conducted to “Assess the implication of water and toilet facilities on the health of households in the Sunyani Municipality, Ghana; Global Positioning System (GPS) Coordinates were taken for each of the nine communities considered under this study; Atuahene, Atronie, Antwikrom, Wawasua, North Bosoma and the Sunyani town (Table 14). All private toilet, public toilet, public water and refuse dumps within each community were identified and further mapped using the GPS coordinates. Coordinates taken were further stored using the handheld GPS (GARMIN S10). Table 14 shows coordinates of all facilities identified in each community.

View this table:

• View inline
• View popup

Table 14: Coordinates obtained from various communities

These coordinates were further imported into the Esri ArcGIS (Geographic Information System) version 10.4.1 environment for further analysis to generate a 2-dimentional map to give a visual representation to findings for easy understanding of all identified facilities and their proximity from each other.

Distances between facilities in each community were also measured using the ArcGIS software to determine their proximity from each other and the likely impact they may have on each other (Figure 1).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 1:

Map generated from coordinates

Discussion

The provision of safe drinking water and improved toilet facilities still remains a challenge in most countries of the developing world (19,20). Globally, providing adequate sanitation is a challenge and the situation is worse in developing countries (6). Improved access to potable water and good sanitation protects the environment and improves public health.

The study found out that the main sources of water in the Sunyani Municipality and the households were boreholes and pipe borne water. However, boreholes were predominant over the pipe borne water from Ghana Water Company Limited (GWCL). The results indicated that there was significant relationship (p<0.001) between the type of water used in the household and the awareness of the health implication. This is corroborated by many studies which show the nexus between access to potable water and health (21,22). Even though respondents would prefer treated water from GWCL, it is only accessible to few and not readily accessible in remote areas leaving majority of the households relying on untreated water for domestic purposes. Respondents who used boreholes were more likely to have awareness of health implications of water and toilet facility whiles those who use rain water were less likely to have an awareness of health implications of water and toilet facilities.

The result indicated that majority of the respondents did not treat their water before use and the few who treated their water mostly did so by boiling. This study agrees with Addo et al. (2014), where most of the households they studied in three selected communities in Accra did not treat their water before use. In their study, Brown & Sobsey (2012) also reported that more than 90% of households they studied in Cambodia used boiling as a method of treating drinking water. The result further indicated relationship between treatment of water (p<0.002) and the method of treatment (p<0.003) to respondents’ awareness of the health implications of water and toilet facilities. Respondents who treat their water before use are more likely to have an awareness of health implications as opposed those who do not treat their water before use. Water treatment is very crucial for households who do not trust the source and quality of water they depend on. Hence, treatment of water before use becomes the best alternative (25). Asefa et al. (2023) also reported in their study from Southern Ethiopia that, 35.8% of their study participants practiced water treatment.

From this study, majority of the households who had to fetch water outside their households join long queues and as such spend longer time in accessing water. Women and children risk their lives in search of water, walking long distance in search of good water sources. The fetching of water can represent a substantial physical and economic burden that predominantly affects women and children (26). In most developing countries, fetching water for drinking and other household uses is a substantial burden that affects water quality and quantity in the household (20).

Water storage was noted as one of the major issues households battled with. This is expected due to inadequate education on water safety. The study revealed that majority of respondents collected water outside the house. It was revealed that the location of water sources (p<0.002) was statistically related to respondents’ awareness of the health implications of water and toilet facilities. Households contributed to the provision of water by way of monetary contribution and communal labour.

The types of toilet facilities in the Sunyani Municipality were public water closet, private water closet, public pit latrine and private pit latrine. This is consistent with the study of Kosoe & Osumanu (2018), where similar toilet facilities were found among respondents in Wa, Ghana. Majority of respondents relied on the public pit latrine. This study concurs with the study of Obeng et al. (2015), where as much as 47% of their respondents relied on pit latrines in a Ghanaian per- urban community. Regular use of latrines has been shown to be very useful to public health (28).

The result indicated that the type of toilet facilities used in the community (p<0.001), the location of toilet facilities (p<0.010) and the number of toilet facilities in the community had a statistical relationship to respondents’ awareness of the health implications of water and toilet facilities. The second largest type of toilet facility (22.6) was others (cat method, wrap and throw) due to inadequate toilet facilities in the municipality. The few toilet facilities which existed in the municipality were untidy leading to respondents’ high unsatisfactory level of cleanliness and thus low patronization. Several studies have also reported similar findings where patrons of public toilet facilities complained of the deplorable state of these toilet facilities (9,15,29). The study further revealed that, management of toilet facilities and satisfaction with the level of cleanliness influenced respondents’ awareness of the health implications of water and toilet facilities. The study revealed that majority of respondents visited toilet facilities outside the household. Again, the few that existed were poor and substandard toilet facilities.

In determining the distance of water source from the household, the study found that, majority of households (38.6%) had their water source within the distance of 101- 200 meters. The results also showed that, the minority of the households (20.2%) had their water sources at a distance less than 50 meters. This means that, the number of the households who walked longer distances to fetch water was higher than those who had their water access point closer. It therefore implies that, there is too much time and energy needed in fetching water and the level of contamination could be determined by the distance of water access point. Households with travel times more than 30 minutes have been shown to collect progressively less water (20).

It was also found that, majority (81.2%) of households do not pay for access to water and the few that pay (18.8%) claim they pay less than 50p, which they deem not affordable. The study again revealed that this high cost for accessibility was due to the increase in utility bills such as electricity. This study is not consistent with the study by Amoah (2020), where households spend more than GH₵84.30 ($14.70) on access to water. This is considered relatively higher.

Majority of households were within 5-10 minutes of toilet facilities. Many respondents (71.0%) made payment for toilet facility from a range of 20-50 pesewas which most (53.8%) deem affordable leading to majority of respondents (71.2%) describing the operations of the toilet facilities as easy. This agrees with the study by Arku et al. (2013) where respondents paid 10 and 20 pesewas to access toilet facilities. The cost of using a toilet facility ranged from 15 to 30 pesewas per use in low-income, Accra (15). Higher user fees to use public toilets, low level of education and unhygienic toilets have been identified as obstacles preventing access to sanitation facilities in urban slums in Ghana (31). The cost of public toilets was described as the most important reason for open defecation (15). In as much as an amount such as 20 Ghana pesewas may seem immaterial, it is quite expensive for individuals who do not have day jobs and even if they do, are being paid an amount unable to cater for their everyday use of toilet facilities. The expensive nature of these facilities has forced individuals moving out of the communities into open areas such as rivers, streams, farms openly defecating. Using the GPS device to map the coordinates of toilet and water facilities, it was realized that, the distance of public water to private toilet was 33.55 meters and the distance of private water to public toilet was 33.11meters. Distance to toilet facility is a key determinant of its usage. Arku et al. (2013) detailed in their study that respondents were not satisfied with having to walk over 500 metres before using a toilet facility. The odds of utilizing latrine in households with more than 6 metres latrine distance from households were 27.43 times higher than those who had less than or equal to 6 metres (32). According to the Sanitation Technologies in Emergencies (2023), the distance between households and shared toilet should be a maximum of 50 metres. Similarly, the distance between toilet and water sources at least 30 metres. This present study recorded a slightly higher distance of 33.11 metres between private water and toilet facility. In a study by Mabvouna et al. (2023), about 70.9% diarrhoea cases were observed in households with external latrines, and among them, 57.1% in households with latrines located at a distance less than 6 metres from households.

Majority of respondents (75.2%) washed their hands after using the toilet whiles 24.8% did not. This means that the 24.8% are highly susceptible of acquiring faeco-oral diseases and stand a chance of infecting the majority that wash their hands. Even though almost half of households in the municipality use public pit latrine, the majority that use other types of toilet facility stand a higher risk of diseases due to unhygienic conditions.

The study revealed four diseases associated with water and toilet facilities in the municipality in the last 12 months as diarrhoea, cholera, typhoid and tuberculosis in descending order. Majority of respondents 248 had diarrhoea once in the last 12 months while only one respondent reported of tuberculosis in the last 12 months.

Conclusion

Inadequate access to clean water and sanitation is a major problem and is an integral part of Ghana’s economic development and poverty reduction policy. Despite the increased support provided to the sector, there are many people still depending on unsafe drinking water source, especially in the rural areas of the country. Those who collect the water (usually women and children) spend much of their time walking miles to carrying water. This leaves them little time for school, other work at home, or community life. Access to potable water and improved toilet facility remains a challenge as most households do not have toilets within their homes. Financial constraints, distance travelled and poor condition of public toilets were the main factors determining utilization of public toilet facilities. The study found that there was significant relationship (p<0.001) between the type of water and toilet used in the household, treatment of water (p<0.002) and the method of treatment (p<0.003), location of water sources and toilet facilities (p<0.002) and the awareness of the health implications of toilet and water facilities.

Competing interest

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Sources of funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Authors’ contribution

HOA and PPAA conceptualized the overall study with its goals and aims. CM retrieved the requisite data from databases. AJB and LIM played a supportive role in data consolidation. AJB wrote the study background and played a supportive role in data analysis. HOA played a vital role in designing the methodology for the study. HOA and AJB played a role in writing the discussion of the study. PPAA, AJB, CM, LIM and HOA supported the writing, review, and editing of the manuscript. PPAA, CM and LIM did the data analysis for the study. All authors contributed significantly to the critical revision and approved the final version before the onward submission.