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