No abstract

Basel Convention, Developing countries, Equity, Hazardous waste,

Household drinking water storage is commonly practiced in rural India. Fecal contamination may be introduced at the water source, during collection, storage, or access. Within a trial of a community-level water supply intervention, we conducted five quarterly household-level surveys to collect information about water, sanitation, and hygiene practices in rural India. In a random subsample of households, we tested stored drinking water samples for Escherichia coli, concurrently observing storage and access practices. We conducted 9961 surveys and collected 3296 stored water samples. Stored water samples were frequently contaminated with E. coli (69%), and E. coli levels were the highest during the wet season. Most households contributing two or more drinking water samples had detectable E. coli in some (47%) or all (44%) samples. Predictors of stored water contamination with E. coli included consumption of river water and open defecation; consumption of reverse osmosis-treated water and safe water access practices appeared to be protective. Until households can be reached with on-premises continuous safe water supplies, suboptimal household water storage practices are likely to continue. Improvements to source water quality alone are unlikely to prevent exposure to contaminated drinking water unless attention is also given to improving household water storage, access, and sanitation practices.

No abstract

Sustainable and low-cost methods for delivery of safe drinking water in resource-limited settings remain suboptimal, which contributes to global diarrhea morbidity. We aimed to assess whether delivery of riverbank filtrationtreated water to newly installed water storage tanks (improved quality and access, intervention condition) reduced reported diarrhea in comparison to delivery of unfiltered river water (improved access alone, control condition) in rural Indian villages. We used a stepped wedge cluster-randomized trial (SW-CRT) design involving four clusters (villages). Selection criteria included village size, proximity to a river, and lack of existing or planned community-level safe water sources. All adults and children were eligible for enrollment. All villages started in the control condition and were sequentially randomized to receive the intervention at 3-month intervals. Our primary outcome was 7-day-period prevalence of self-or caregiver-reported diarrhea, measured at 3-month intervals (five time points). Analysis was by intention to treat. Because blinding was not possible, we incorporated questions about symptoms unrelated to water consumption to check response validity (negative control symptoms). We measured outcomes in 2,222 households (9,836 participants). We did not find a measurable reduction in diarrhea post-intervention (RR: 0.98 [95% CI: 0.24-4.09]); possible explanations include low intervention uptake, availability of other safe water sources, low baseline diarrheal prevalence, and reporting fatigue. Our study highlights both the difficulties in evaluating the impact of real-world interventions and the potential for an optimized SW-CRT design to address budgetary, funding, and logistical constraints inherent in such evaluations.