Skip to main content

Table 4 Percent distribution of level wear and tear (holes) and repair practices of the nets received from the campaign

From: Impact of a behaviour change communication programme on net durability in eastern Uganda

 

Baseline

Endline

 

Olyset sample

PermaNet sample

Comparison

Intervention

P valueπ

Comparison

Intervention

P valueπ

Intervention

Net ever had a hole

N = 795

N = 695

 

N = 718

N = 535

 

N = 718

 Yes [95 % CI]

11.1 [8.3–13.9]

15.4 [7.2–23.6]

0.329

82.5 [76.5–88.4]

93.0 [88.3–97.7]

0.008

86.5 [81.9–91.0]

Hole repairs [95 % CI]

N = 90

N = 98

 

N = 604

N = 497

 

N = 619

 Any repairs

3.4

5.6

0.559

48.0

56.4

0.179

60.1

 No. of full repairs, mean [95 % CI]

0.0

0.1 [0.0–0.2]

0.098

0.6 [0.5–0.8]

1.8 [1.4–2.2]

<0.001

1.3 [1.1–1.6]

 No. of partial repairs, mean [95 % CI]

0.0 [0.0–0.1]

0.1 [0.0–0.2)

0.635

0.7 [0.5–0.8]

1.5 [0.9–2.2]

0.015

1.5 [1.2–1.9]

 Proportionate hole index (pHI), mediana

N = 90

N = 98

 

N = 718

N = 535

 

N = 718

 Overall

26

60

0.154

830

837

0.045

275

Net condition (based on pHI category)

 Good (pHI < 64)

96.0

92.4

0.231

32.6

14.2

0.017

38.1

 Damaged (pHI 65–642)

3.1

5.0

22.8

28.0

36.5

 Too torn (pHI > 642)

0.8

2.5

44.7

57.8

25.4

 Serviceable (pHI 0–642)

99.2

97.5

0.196

55.4

42.2

0.034

74.6

 Too torn (pHI > 642)

0.8

2.5

44.7

57.8

25.4

  1. The endline results are presented for nets identified as Olyset in comparison and intervention district and nets identified as PermaNet for the intervention district only
  2. Nets still in package were excluded
  3. πP values are shown for each comparison between districts separately
  4. aNets without holes were excluded