Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Dec;5(12):e003045.
doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2020-003045.

Estimating the cost of interventions to improve water, sanitation and hygiene in healthcare facilities across India

Affiliations

Estimating the cost of interventions to improve water, sanitation and hygiene in healthcare facilities across India

Katie K Tseng et al. BMJ Glob Health. 2020 Dec.

Abstract

Introduction: Despite increasing utilisation of institutional healthcare in India, many healthcare facilities (HCFs) lack access to basic water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) services. WASH services protect patients by improving infection prevention and control (IPC), which in turn can reduce the burden of healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). However, data on the cost of implementing WASH interventions in Indian HCFs are limited.

Methods: We surveyed 32 HCFs across India, varying in size, type and setting to obtain the direct costs of providing improved water supply, sanitation and IPC-supporting infrastructure. We calculated the average costs of WASH interventions and the number of HCFs nationwide requiring investments in WASH to estimate the financial cost of improving WASH across India's public healthcare system over 1 year.

Results: Improving WASH across India's public healthcare sector and sustaining services among upgraded facilities for 1 year would cost US$354 million in capital costs and US$289 million in recurrent costs from the provider perspective. The most costly interventions were those on water (US$238 million), linen reprocessing (US$112 million) and sanitation (US$104 million), while the least costly were interventions on hand hygiene (US$52 million), medical device reprocessing (US$56 million) and environmental surface cleaning (US$80 million). Overall, investments in rural HCFs would account for 64.4% of total costs, of which 52.3% would go towards primary health centres.

Conclusion: Improving IPC in Indian public HCFs can aid in the prevention of HAIs to reduce the spread of antimicrobial resistance. Although WASH is a necessary component of IPC, coverage remains low in HCFs in India. Using ex-post costs, our results estimate the investment levels needed to improve WASH across the Indian public healthcare system and provide a basis for policymakers to support IPC-related National Action Plan activities for antimicrobial resistance through investments in WASH.

Keywords: disease; disorder; health economics; health policy; health systems; or injury; other infection; public health.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
National costs of implementing water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) interventions across the Indian public healthcare system for 1 year for (A) all healthcare facilities, (B) primary health centers only, (C) community health centers only, and (D) district hospital and medical colleges only. Each bar is the estimated financial capital and recurrent costs of implementing and sustaining interventions in WASH for a period of 1 year. Costs were estimated from ex-post, real-world costs obtained from a survey of 32 Indian heatlthcare facilities, and reported in US dollars (USD) based on 2018 prices.

References

    1. Cronk R, Bartram J. Environmental conditions in health care facilities in low- and middle-income countries: coverage and inequalities. Int J Hyg Environ Health 2018;221:409–22. 10.1016/j.ijheh.2018.01.004 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Allegranzi B, Bagheri Nejad S, Combescure C, et al. Burden of endemic health-care-associated infection in developing countries: systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet 2011;377:228–41. 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61458-4 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Watson J, D'Mello-Guyett L, Flynn E, et al. Interventions to improve water supply and quality, sanitation and handwashing facilities in healthcare facilities, and their effect on healthcare-associated infections in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review and supplementary scoping review. BMJ Glob Health 2019;4:e001632. 10.1136/bmjgh-2019-001632 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. WHO, UNICEF, SHARE Water, sanitation and hygiene in health care facilities: global strategy, burden of disease, and evidence and action priorities. London, 2016. Available: https://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/facilities/healthcare-facili...
    1. Zaidi AKM, Huskins WC, Thaver D, et al. Hospital-Acquired neonatal infections in developing countries. Lancet 2005;365:1175–88. 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)71881-X - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources