Skip to main content

Table 3 Logistic regression analysis of factors associated with latrine utilization among non-model families in Woreda Laelai Maichew, Tigray, Ethiopia, 2017

From: Factors associated with latrine utilization among model and non-model families in Laelai Maichew Woreda, Aksum, Tigray, Ethiopia: comparative community based study

variables

Category

Latrine utilization

COR (95% CI)

AOR (95% CI)

Yes (%)

No (%)

Age

< 35

45 (51.7)

41 (48.3)

2.820 (1.435, 5.539)

3.112 (1.539, 6.294)**

36–50

80 (50.6)

78 (49.4)

2.699 (1.462, 4.984)

2.776 (1.464, 5.266)**

> 50

19 (27.5)

50 (72.5)

1.00

1.00

Education

Illiterate

77 (41.0)

110 (59.0)

1.00

1.00

Primary and above

67 (46.8)

59 (53.2)

1.637 (1.039, 2.58)

2.03 (1.427, 4.638)

Occupation

Other

20 (69.0)

8 (31.0)

1.00

1.00

Farmer

124 (43.5)

161 (56.5)

0.347 (0.153, 0.788)

0.351 (0.150, 0.826)*

Type of latrine

Open pit

8 (23.5)

25 (76.5)

1.00

 

Pit without slab

99 (45.2)

120 (54.8)

2.681 (1.162, 6.185)

 

Pit with slab

35 (60.3)

23 (39.7)

4.946 (1.910, 12.803)

 

Ventilated latrine

2 (66.7)

1 (33.3)

6.500 (0.519, 81.424)

 

Maintenance requirement

Need maintenance

118 (43.2)

154 (56.8)

1.00

 

Maintained

26 (63.4)

15 (36.6)

2.277 (1.155, 4.490)

 

Privacy

No privacy

89 (42.0)

122 (58.0)

1.00

1.00

Poor privacy

25 (39.7)

38 (60.3)

0.909 (0.512, 1.614)

0.822 (0.448, 1.508)

Adequate privacy

30 (76.9)

9 (23.1)

4.607 (2.084, 10.184)

2.942 (1.251, 6.919)*

Latrine cleanness

No

101 (39.6)

153 (60.4)

1.00

1.00

Yes

43 (72.9)

16 (27.1)

4.098 (2.190, 7.667)

4.098 (2.190, 7.667)***

  1. p value * = 0.05–0.01, ** = 0.01–0.001, *** =  < 0.001