BackgroundThe aim of this study was to estimate the prevalence of disability and its associated risk factors among adults aged 18 years and over in Bogra district, Bangladesh.MethodsThe Rapid Assessment of Disability (RAD) survey was conducted using probability-proportional-to-size sampling to select 66 clusters each with 50 people aged 18 years and older in 2010. Households within clusters were selected through compact segment sampling. Disability was identified based on the responses to the self-assessment of functioning section of the RAD questionnaire. Descriptive and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to model the associations between risk factors and disability status.ResultsOf 1855 adults who participated in the study, 195 (10.5 %) had disability. Age and gender adjusted prevalence of disability in Bogra district was 8.9 % (95 % CI: 7.7, 10.3). The highest prevalence of functional limitation was related to psychological distress (4.7 %; 95 % CI: 3.8, 5.7) followed by vision (4.4 %; 95 % CI: 3.6, 5.4), and hearing (2.3 %; 95 % CI: 1.7, 3.0) difficulties. The adjusted odds of disability increased with age with approximately eight-fold increase from 2.9 % (95 % CI: 1.6, 5.1) in 18–24 years to 24.5 % (95 % CI: 20.2, 29.4) in 55 years and above. People with poor socio-economic status (OR 1.90; 95 % CI: 1.1, 3.3) and who were unemployed (OR = 4.6; 95 % CI: 1.8, 11.6) were more like to have disability compared to the higher socio-economic status and those who have an occupation respectively.ConclusionsThere is a significant need for promoting programs for health, well-being, and rehabilitation, and policies specifically targeting the older population, women, unemployed and poor people in Bangladesh.

Background: Adequate access to water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) is imperative for health and wellbeing, yet people with disabilities, people with incontinence and people who menstruate often experience unmet WASH requirements.Methods: In 2019 we completed a mixed-methods study in two provinces of Vanuatu, (SANMA and TORBA). The study comprised 1) a population-based disability survey using the Washington Group Short-Set 2) a nested case-control study to explore associations between WASH, disability and gender, and 3) an in-depth qualitative assessment of the experiences of WASH users with additional requirements: people with and without disabilities who menstruate, or experience incontinence.Finding: 11,446 households (response rate 85%) were enrolled into the survey. All-age disability prevalence across the two provinces was 2.6% (95% Confidence Interval 2.5-2.8), increasing with age. 814 people with, and 702 people without disabilities participated in the case-control study. People with disabilities were statistically more likely to experience barriers in seven of eight intra-household indicators. WASH-related stigma, reliance on informal caregivers, and under-resourcing of WASH personnel were critical issues for people who menstruate or experience incontinence.Interpretation: People with disabilities, people with incontinence and people who menstruate in Northern Vanuatu face continued challenges in accessing safe, affordable and appropriate WASH that meets their requirements. Outputs from this study have supported progression towards gender and disabilityinclusive WASH programming in the area and highlighted the value of mixed-methods research.Funding: The research was funded by the Australian Government's Water for Women fund and donations from the Australian public.

BackgroundThe Rapid Assessment of Disability (RAD) questionnaire measures the magnitude and impact of disability and aims to inform the design of disability inclusive development programs. This paper reports the psychometric evaluation of the RAD.MethodsThe initial version of the RAD comprised five sections: 1) demographics, 2) functioning, 3) rights awareness, 4) well-being, and 5) access to the community. Item functioning and construct validity were assessed in a population-based study in Bangladesh. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics (sections 2 and 5) and Rasch modelling (sections 3 and 4). A subsequent case–control study in Fiji tested the refined questionnaire in a cross-cultural setting and assessed the sensitivity and specificity of the RAD section 2 to identify people with disability.Results2,057 adults took part in the study (1,855 in Bangladesh and 202 in Fiji). The prevalence of disability estimated using RAD section 2 in Bangladesh was 10.5% (95% CI 8.8-12.2), with satisfactory sensitivity and specificity (62.4% and 81.2%, respectively). Section 3 exhibited multidimensionality and poor differentiation between levels of rights awareness in both Bangladesh (person separation index [PSI] = 0.71) and Fiji (PSI = 0.0), and was unable to distinguish between people with and without disability (Bangladesh p = 0.786, Fiji p = 0.403). This section was subsequently removed from the questionnaire pending re-development. Section 4 had good ability to differentiate between levels of well-being (PSI = 0.82). In both countries, people with disability had significantly worse well-being scores than people without disability (p < 0.001) and also access to all sectors of community except legal assistance, drinking water and toilets (p < 0.001).ConclusionsFiled-testing in Bangladesh and Fiji confirmed the psychometric robustness of functioning, well-being, and community access sections of the RAD. Information from the questionnaire can be used to inform and evaluate disability inclusive development programs.