TY - JOUR
T1 - Evaluation of an Australian indigenous housing programme: community level impact on crowding, infrastructure function and hygiene
AU - Bailie, Ross
AU - McDonald, Elizabeth
AU - Stevens, Matthew
AU - Guthridge, Steven
AU - Brewster, David
PY - 2011/5
Y1 - 2011/5
N2 - Background and Aim: Housing programmes in indigenous Australian communities have focused largely on achieving good standards of infrastructure function. The impact of this approach was assessed on three potentially important housing-related influences on child health at the community level: (1) crowding, (2) the functional state of the house infrastructure and (3) the hygienic condition of the houses. Methods: A before-and-after study, including house infrastructure surveys and structured interviews with the main householder, was conducted in all homes of young children in 10 remote Australian indigenous communities. Results: Compared with baseline, follow-up surveys showed (1) a small non-significant decrease in the mean number of people per bedroom in the house on the night before the survey (3.4, 95% CI 3.1 to 3.6 at baseline vs 3.2, 95% CI 2.9 to 3.4 at follow-up; natural logarithm transformed t test, t=1.3, p=0.102); (2) a marginally significant overall improvement in infrastructure function scores (KruskaleWallis test, χ2=3.9, p=0.047); and (3) no clear overall improvement in hygiene (KruskaleWallis test, χ2=0.3, p=0.605). Conclusion Housing programmes of this scale that focus on the provision of infrastructure alone appear unlikely to lead to more hygienic general living environments, at least in this study context. A broader ecological approach to housing programmes delivered in these communities is needed if potential health benefits are to be maximised. This ecological approach would require a balanced programme of improving access to health hardware, hygiene promotion and creating a broader enabling environment in communities.
AB - Background and Aim: Housing programmes in indigenous Australian communities have focused largely on achieving good standards of infrastructure function. The impact of this approach was assessed on three potentially important housing-related influences on child health at the community level: (1) crowding, (2) the functional state of the house infrastructure and (3) the hygienic condition of the houses. Methods: A before-and-after study, including house infrastructure surveys and structured interviews with the main householder, was conducted in all homes of young children in 10 remote Australian indigenous communities. Results: Compared with baseline, follow-up surveys showed (1) a small non-significant decrease in the mean number of people per bedroom in the house on the night before the survey (3.4, 95% CI 3.1 to 3.6 at baseline vs 3.2, 95% CI 2.9 to 3.4 at follow-up; natural logarithm transformed t test, t=1.3, p=0.102); (2) a marginally significant overall improvement in infrastructure function scores (KruskaleWallis test, χ2=3.9, p=0.047); and (3) no clear overall improvement in hygiene (KruskaleWallis test, χ2=0.3, p=0.605). Conclusion Housing programmes of this scale that focus on the provision of infrastructure alone appear unlikely to lead to more hygienic general living environments, at least in this study context. A broader ecological approach to housing programmes delivered in these communities is needed if potential health benefits are to be maximised. This ecological approach would require a balanced programme of improving access to health hardware, hygiene promotion and creating a broader enabling environment in communities.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79955495737&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1136/jech.2009.091637
DO - 10.1136/jech.2009.091637
M3 - Article
SN - 0143-005X
VL - 65
SP - 432
EP - 437
JO - Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health
JF - Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health
IS - 5
ER -