Estimating drinking-water ingestion and dermal contact with water in a French population of pregnant women: the EDDS cohort study

Abstract

The aim of the present study, a part of the Endocrine Disruptor Deux-Sèvres (EDDS) cohort study, was to estimate water-use habits of pregnant French women. The study population consisted of 132 pregnant women living in Deux-Sèvres (France) in 2012-2013, in areas where drinking water is exclusively produced by surface water. Drinking-water data included ingested water (tap, bottled and filtered) and ingestion place (home, work and elsewhere). Dermal contact with water included showering, bathing, swimming, spa use, hand-washing and other water activities. Data were collected through face-to-face interviews at second and third trimesters of pregnancy with a 1-day-recall questionnaire. Intertrimestral differences in water-use habits were assessed. Predictors of water ingestion and duration of dermal contact with water were assessed with multiple linear regressions. At the second trimester of pregnancy, the mean total drinking-water ingestion was 1.8±0.6 l per day (mean and SD), 71% of which was tap water. Total drinking-water ingestion was not different between both trimesters but ingestion place differed. Dermal contact with water estimate was 188±118 and 173±92 min/week at second and third trimesters, respectively. Smoking increased water ingestion 777 ml/day 95% CI (171-1384). Duration of dermal contact in spring was 30 min/week 95% CI (13-48) higher than in winter. Obese women spend 26 min/week 95% CI (2-50) more showering than women with recommended weight. Our estimates of pregnant French women's exposure to water will help researchers to better assess water pollutant risks.

Association between Exposure to Endocrine Disruptors in Drinking Water and Preterm Birth, Taking Neighborhood Deprivation into Account: A Historic Cohort Study

“…A recent study we conducted in Deux-Sèvres on pregnant women (EDDS cohort study), showed that 94% of them drank home tap water and only 48+% drank bottled water) [38]. Moreover, as low income women may drink more bottled water than high income women, because they considered that their tap water quality is worse [39]; we have maybe overestimated atrazine metabolite exposure of women from most deprived areas.…”

Comparison of the Effect on Fetal Growth of a Mixture of Atrazine and Nitrates in Drinking Water and of Active Tobacco Exposure during Pregnancy

“…In the United States, it has been observed that pregnant and non-pregnant women do not differ in tap water consumption [49]. Furthermore, recent results from the Endocrine Disruptor Deux-Sèvres (EDDS) cohort study showed that 71% of pregnant women drank tap water [50] so it may not have affected our estimates. Besides, using ecological data on drinking-water prevents selection bias that can be found in cohort studies.…”

Impact of perinatal environmental health education intervention on exposure to endocrine disruptors during pregnancy - PREVED study: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

“…Furthermore, selection bias is controlled by trained PMI nurses wishing to facilitate the enrolment of pregnant women facing di culties. Enrolment bias is thereby avoided, whereas preceding studies highlighted the fact that participants for this type of study are mostly women with a high socio-economic level [48]. However, in such a cohort, selection bias can still be expected [77] especially for pregnancy cohorts, insofar as women with a high socio-educational level are likely to feel more concerned [78,79].…”

“…According to the results of the EDDS (Endocrine Disruptors Deux-Sèvres) cohort study, 83% of French women consumed canned food [48]. Thus, we calculated the number of participants based on the primary outcome measure (consumption measure) using a two-sided paired sample t-test with 0.05 level of signi cance two-way design and β = 0.20.…”

“…Percentage of participants who reported consuming manufactured or industrial food determined through a sociodemographic and consumption questionnaire (Q1) developed by our research team[48] Secondary outcomes:Mean score of psychosocial questionnaire (Q2) developed by our team, whose dimensions are presented in…”