Interventions to improve water quality for preventing diarrhoea

Abstract

BackgroundDiarrhoea is a major cause of death and disease, especially among young children in low-income countries. In these settings, many infectious agents associated with diarrhoea are spread through water contaminated with faeces.In remote and low-income settings, source-based water quality improvement includes providing protected groundwater (springs, wells, and bore holes), or harvested rainwater as an alternative to surface sources (rivers and lakes). Point-of-use water quality improvement interventions include boiling, chlorination, flocculation, filtration, or solar disinfection, mainly conducted at home.ObjectivesTo assess the effectiveness of interventions to improve water quality for preventing diarrhoea.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register (11 November 2014), CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library, 7 November 2014), MEDLINE (1966 to 10 November 2014), EMBASE (1974 to 10 November 2014), and LILACS (1982 to 7 November 2014). We also handsearched relevant conference proceedings, contacted researchers and organizations working in the field, and checked references from identified studies through 11 November 2014.Selection criteriaRandomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, and controlled before-and-after studies (CBA) comparing interventions aimed at improving the microbiological quality of drinking water with no intervention in children and adults.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We used meta-analyses to estimate pooled measures of effect, where appropriate, and investigated potential sources of heterogeneity using subgroup analyses. We assessed the quality of evidence using the GRADE approach.Main resultsForty-five cluster-RCTs, two quasi-RCTs, and eight CBA studies, including over 84,000 participants, met the inclusion criteria. Most included studies were conducted in low- or middle-income countries (LMICs) (50 studies) with unimproved water sources (30 studies) and unimproved or unclear sanitation (34 studies). The primary outcome in most studies was self-reported diarrhoea, which is at high risk of bias due to the lack of blinding in over 80% of the included studies.Source-based water quality improvementsThere is currently insufficient evidence to know if source-based improvements such as protected wells, communal tap stands, or chlorination/filtration of community sources consistently reduce diarrhoea (one cluster-RCT, five CBA studies, very low quality evidence). We found no studies evaluating reliable piped-in water supplies delivered to households.Point-of-use water quality interventionsOn average, distributing water disinfection products for use at the household level may reduce diarrhoea by around one quarter (Home chlorination products: RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.91; 14 trials, 30,746 participants, low quality evidence; flocculation and disinfection sachets: RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.82, four trials, 11,788 participants, moderate quality evidence). However, there was substantial h...

Do low-cost ceramic water filters improve water security in rural South Africa?

“…The majority (84 %) reported no incidents of digestive afflictions, including diarrhoea, in the family during the last 5 years. This was supported by an official statement by the Hobeni Clinic, although morbidity rates depend on self-reporting from the household members, which is known to produce substantial bias (Wolf et al, 2014;Clasen et al, 2015). Also, the microbiological water quality of 51 tested CCFSs showed contrasting results: none of the filtrate samples was free of coliform bacteria and 35 % even showed a deterioration in water quality (Fig.…”

“…BSF with plastic housing was found to be as efficient as its concrete counterparts (Fabiszewski de Aceituno et al, 2012) and various researchers reported the success of locally produced, low-cost CWF Simonis and Basson, 2011;Mwabi et al, 2013). Recent reviews of reduction of diarrhoea by different POU interventions found filtration techniques superior to solar or chemical water disinfection (Wolf et al, 2014;Clasen et al, 2015). However, comparisons were blurred by a high risk of bias, since the data relied on self-reported diarrhoea and placebo POU interventions were missing.…”

Solar Powered Microplasma-Generated Ozone: Assessment of a Novel Point-of-Use Drinking Water Treatment Method

“…However, these approaches can be difficult to maintain, and are often abandoned by users because of the taste of chlorinated water, the time required to treat the water, and the ongoing need to purchase water treatment materials [5][6][7][8]. Furthermore, the evidence supporting health benefits (such as reductions in rates of childhood diarrhea) of POU treatment has been disappointing, due in part to limited adherence to POU treatment [9], which itself is impacted by factors such as the taste of treated water and complexity of the treatment [7,10].…”

Design and rationale of a matched cohort study to assess the effectiveness of a combined household-level piped water and sanitation intervention in rural Odisha, India

“…[7][8][9][10][11] While combined interventions would be expected to have a greater influence on multiple exposure pathways and thus a greater combined impact on health, there is limited evidence of additive benefits. 12 This may be due to poor uptake, inconsistent use or an incomplete understanding of relevant pathways. [8][9][10] In India, combining water and sanitation interventions may be more critical than just interrupting multiple transmission pathways for enteric infection; evidence suggests that household-level water access is integral to the use of improved sanitation in this context.…”