Case study demonstrates user-centered co-design of solar rainwater disinfection in maternal healthcare facilities, highlighting behavioural strategies to improve technology adoption.
Access to safe water is essential for maternal and neonatal care, yet many healthcare facilities (HCFs) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) face severe water scarcity, undermining service delivery and patient outcomes. Malawi exemplifies this challenge. While technologies such as solar disinfection of harvested rainwater (HRW-SODIS) offer potential solutions, mere deployment does not guarantee adoption or sustainability. This study reports on experiences and lessons learned from the design of the SURG-Water project, which is testing, for the first time, the application of HRW-SODIS in clinical settings. Rather than focusing solely on technical performance, the project employed a co-design process grounded in behavioural science and design thinking to align both the technology and its deployment strategy with facility workflows, user preferences and socio-cultural norms. Two maternal HCFs were purposively selected for the pilot, and a participatory design process involving health workers, community leaders and government stakeholders guided iterative HRW-SODIS system development. Site assessments, interviews, and focus groups revealed behavioural, infrastructural, and institutional factors that shaped design choices. This process produced not just a water treatment solution, but an integrated strategy including staff training, educational materials, and community sensitisation. The work demonstrates a clear pathway from scientific concept to contextually grounded intervention design. The SURG-Water model offers a replicable example of how interdisciplinary, user-centred methods can be used to bridge knowledge and practice in resource-constrained healthcare settings. While SODIS has existed for years, it remains underused; this approach provides a practical step toward addressing real-world barriers to uptake, starting from its design.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pittalis et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: