Use, microbiological effectiveness and health impact of a household water filter intervention in rural Rwanda—A matched cohort study

Lifestraw Family water filters in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis to define longer-term public health impact against childhood diarrhoea and inform scale-up

Background

Diarrhoeal disease disproportionately affects children <5 years in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The pathogens responsible for diarrhoea are commonly transmitted through faecally-contaminated drinking water. Lifestraw Family point-of-use water filters have been the subject of intervention studies for over a decade and were the first filters evaluated by the World Health Organization in its water treatment evaluation scheme to provide comprehensive protection against many diarrhoea-causing pathogens. This systematic review aimed to: 1) report on aspects related to physical environment and implementation and 2) conduct an updated meta-analysis on Lifestraw Family filter effectiveness against childhood diarrhoea based on studies with ≥12 months of follow-up.

Methods

We conducted a literature search in November 2022 using MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and CINAHL databases. Inclusion criteria were: 1) RCTs, cluster-RCTs, quasi-experimental, or matched cohort studies on 2) Lifestraw Family 1.0 or 2.0 filters 3) conducted in LMICs 4) that evaluated filter effectiveness against diarrhoea in children <5 and 5) analysed ≥12 months of follow-up data on clinical effectiveness against diarrhoea and were 6) published from 2010 with 7) full-text availability in English. A modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess risk of bias. Relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were extracted and analysed using a random-effects meta-analysis.

Results

We included 6 studies in LMICs involving 4740 children <5. Of the four clinically-effective interventions, common characteristics were access to improved water sources (75%), the 2.0 version of the filter or the 1.0 version with additional water storage (100%), use of behaviour change theory, community engagement, and health messaging (75%), local filter repair-and-replace mechanisms (75%), and specially-trained local interventionists (100%). The meta-analysis showed a 30% reduction in diarrhoea risk in the intervention group (RR = 0.69; 95% CI = 0.52-0.91, P = 0.01).

Conclusions

Lifestraw Family water filters can be effective interventions to reduce diarrhoea in vulnerable paediatric populations for at least one year, though certain aspects related to physical environment and implementation may increase their public health impact. The findings of this study suggest considerations for scale-up that can be applied in settings in need of longer-term interim solutions until universal access to safe drinking water is achieved.

Effects of adding household water filters to Rwanda's Community-Based Environmental Health Promotion Programme: a cluster-randomized controlled trial in Rwamagana district

Unsafe drinking water remains a major cause of mortality and morbidity. While Rwanda's Community-Based Environmental Health Promotion Programme (CBEHPP) promotes boiling and safe storage, previous research found these efforts to be ineffective in reducing fecal contamination of drinking water. We conducted a cluster randomized control led trial to determine if adding a household water filter with safe storage to the CBEHPP would improve drinking water quality and reduce child diarrhea. We enrolled 1,199 households with a pregnant person or child under 5 across 60 randomly selected villages in Rwamagana district. CBEHPP implementers distributed and promoted water purifiers to a random half of villages. We conducted two unannounced follow-up visits over 13-16 months after the intervention delivery. The intervention reduced the proportions of households with detectable E. coli in drinking water samples (primary outcome) by 20% (PR 0.80, 95% CI 0.74-0.87, p < 0.001) and with moderate and higher fecal contamination (≥10 CFU/100 mL) by 35% (PR 0.65, 95% CI 0.57-0.74, p < 0.001). The proportion of children under 5 experiencing diarrhea in the last week was reduced by 49% (aPR 0.51, 95%CI 0.35-0.73, p < 0.001). Our findings identify an effective intervention for improving water quality and child health that can be added to the CBEHPP.

Only Low Effects of Water Filters on the Enteric Carriage of Gastrointestinal Pathogen DNA in Colombian Indigenous People

Water filtration is a common strategy of water sanitation in resource-poor tropical settings. Here, we assessed the intermediate term effect of this preventive procedure including specific filter-related as well as general hygiene training on the molecular detection of enteric pathogens in stool samples from Colombian Indigenous people. From a total of 89 individuals from an Indigenous tribe called Wiwa, stool samples were assessed by real-time PCR for enteropathogenic microorganisms prior to the implementation of water filtration-based infection prevention. Three years after the onset of the preventive strategy, a follow-up assessment was performed. A significantly beneficial effect of water filtration could be shown for Ascaris spp. only (p = 0.035) and a tendency (p = 0.059) for Hymenolepis nana. No hints for effects on the gastrointestinal shedding of Giardia duodenalis, Entamoeba histolytica, Cryptosporidium spp., Campylobacter spp., Shigella spp./enteroinvasive Escherichia coli, Necator americanus, Strongyloides stercoralis, Trichuris trichiura, and Taenia spp. were seen. In conclusion, the study indicates that water filtration can only be an element of a multi-modal hygiene concept to reduce enteric pathogen carriage in inhabitants of resource-poor tropical settings in spite of tendencies of beneficial effects.

Fabrication of polypyrrole nanowire arrays-modified electrode for point-of-use water disinfection via low-voltage electroporation

Still ∼10% of world's population has no sustainable access to centralized water supply system, causing millions of deaths annually by waterborne diseases. Here, we develop polypyrrole nanowire arrays (PPyNWs)-modified electrodes by polymerization of pyrrole on graphite felt for point-of-use water disinfection via low-voltage electroporation. A flow-through mode is specially applied to alleviate diffusion barrier of pyrrole in the porous graphite felt for uniform PPyNWs growth. The flow-through disinfection device using the optimized PPyNWs electrode achieves above 4-log removal for model virus (MS2) and gram-positive/negative bacteria (E. faecalis and E. coli) at applied voltage of 1.0 V and fluxes below 1000 and 2500 L/m²/h. Electroporation is recognized as the dominant disinfection mechanism by using square-wave alternating voltage of ±1.0 V to eliminate the electrochemical reactions. In-situ sampling experiments reveal that anode acts as the main disinfection function due to its electric field attraction with negatively charged E. coli cells. The live/dead baclight staining experiments indicate an adsorption-desorption process of E. coli cells on anode, and the adsorption-desorption balance determines the disinfection abilities of PPyNWs anode. Under 1.0 V and 2000 L/m²/h, the disinfection device enables above 4-log E. coli removal in tap water within 7-day operation with energy consumption below 20 mJ/L, suggesting its sound application potential for point-of-use water disinfection.

Interventions promoting uptake of water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) technologies in low- and middle-income countries: An evidence and gap map of effectiveness studies

Background

Lack of access to and use of water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) cause 1.6 million deaths every year, of which 1.2 million are due to gastrointestinal illnesses like diarrhoea and acute respiratory infections like pneumonia. Poor WASH access and use also diminish nutrition and educational attainment, and cause danger and stress for vulnerable populations, especially for women and girls. The hardest hit regions are sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 6 calls for the end of open defecation, and universal access to safely managed water and sanitation facilities, and basic hand hygiene, by 2030. WASH access and use also underpin progress in other areas such as SDG1 poverty targets, SDG3 health and SDG4 education targets. Meeting the SDG equity agenda to "leave none behind" will require WASH providers prioritise the hardest to reach including those living remotely and people who are disadvantaged.

Objectives

Decision makers need access to high-quality evidence on what works in WASH promotion in different contexts, and for different groups of people, to reach the most disadvantaged populations and thereby achieve universal targets. The WASH evidence map is envisioned as a tool for commissioners and researchers to identify existing studies to fill synthesis gaps, as well as helping to prioritise new studies where there are gaps in knowledge. It also supports policymakers and practitioners to navigate the evidence base, including presenting critically appraised findings from existing systematic reviews.

Methods

This evidence map presents impact evaluations and systematic reviews from the WASH sector, organised according to the types of intervention mechanisms, WASH technologies promoted, and outcomes measured. It is based on a framework of intervention mechanisms (e.g., behaviour change triggering or microloans) and outcomes along the causal pathway, specifically behavioural outcomes (e.g., handwashing and food hygiene practices), ill-health outcomes (e.g., diarrhoeal morbidity and mortality), nutrition and socioeconomic outcomes (e.g., school absenteeism and household income). The map also provides filters to examine the evidence for a particular WASH technology (e.g., latrines), place of use (e.g., home, school or health facility), location (e.g., global region, country, rural and urban) and group (e.g., people living with disability). Systematic searches for published and unpublished literature and trial registries were conducted of studies in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Searches were conducted in March 2018, and searches for completed trials were done in May 2020. Coding of information for the map was done by two authors working independently. Impact evaluations were critically appraised according to methods of conduct and reporting. Systematic reviews were critically appraised using a new approach to assess theory-based, mixed-methods evidence synthesis.

Results

There has been an enormous growth in impact evaluations and systematic reviews of WASH interventions since the International Year of Sanitation, 2008. There are now at least 367 completed or ongoing rigorous impact evaluations in LMICs, nearly three-quarters of which have been conducted since 2008, plus 43 systematic reviews. Studies have been done in 83 LMICs, with a high concentration in Bangladesh, India, and Kenya. WASH sector programming has increasingly shifted in focus from what technology to supply (e.g., a handwashing station or child's potty), to the best way in which to do so to promote demand. Research also covers a broader set of intervention mechanisms. For example, there has been increased interest in behaviour change communication using psychosocial "triggering", such as social marketing and community-led total sanitation. These studies report primarily on behavioural outcomes. With the advent of large-scale funding, in particular by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, there has been a substantial increase in the number of studies on sanitation technologies, particularly latrines. Sustaining behaviour is fundamental for sustaining health and other quality of life improvements. However, few studies have been done of intervention mechanisms for, or measuring outcomes on sustained adoption of latrines to stop open defaecation. There has also been some increase in the number of studies looking at outcomes and interventions that disproportionately affect women and girls, who quite literally carry most of the burden of poor water and sanitation access. However, most studies do not report sex disaggregated outcomes, let alone integrate gender analysis into their framework. Other vulnerable populations are even less addressed; no studies eligible for inclusion in the map were done of interventions targeting, or reporting on outcomes for, people living with disabilities. We were only able to find a single controlled evaluation of WASH interventions in a health care facility, in spite of the importance of WASH in health facilities in global policy debates. The quality of impact evaluations has improved, such as the use of controlled designs as standard, attention to addressing reporting biases, and adequate cluster sample size. However, there remain important concerns about quality of reporting. The quality and usefulness of systematic reviews for policy is also improving, which draw clearer distinctions between intervention mechanisms and synthesise the evidence on outcomes along the causal pathway. Adopting mixed-methods approaches also provides information for programmes on barriers and enablers affecting implementation.

Conclusion

Ensuring everyone has access to appropriate water, sanitation, and hygiene facilities is one of the most fundamental of challenges for poverty elimination. Researchers and funders need to consider carefully where there is the need for new primary evidence, and new syntheses of that evidence. This study suggests the following priority areas:Impact evaluations incorporating understudied outcomes, such as sustainability and slippage, of WASH provision in understudied places of use, such as health care facilities, and of interventions targeting, or presenting disaggregated data for, vulnerable populations, particularly over the life-course and for people living with a disability;Improved reporting in impact evaluations, including presentation of participant flow diagrams; andSynthesis studies and updates in areas with sufficient existing and planned impact evaluations, such as for diarrhoea mortality, ARIs, WASH in schools and decentralisation. These studies will preferably be conducted as mixed-methods systematic reviews that are able to answer questions about programme targeting, implementation, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, and compare alternative intervention mechanisms to achieve and sustain outcomes in particular contexts, preferably using network meta-analysis.

Laboratory Efficacy of Locally Available Backwashing Methods at Removing Fouling in Hollow-Fiber Membrane Filters Used for Household Water Treatment

Hollow-fiber membrane filters (HFMFs) for household water treatment (HWT) can efficaciously remove disease-causing organisms in laboratory settings. However, lower effectiveness in use in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and humanitarian contexts (HCs) has been observed and attributed to membrane fouling and the associated cleaning. In LMICs/HCs, it is not possible to prevent and control fouling using commonly known methods (e.g., testing influent water, maintenance regimes), and the literature on fouling/cleaning of HFMFs distributed in LMICs is scarce. As such, controlled laboratory experiments were conducted to determine the efficacy of locally available (in LMICs/HCs) backwashing solutions at removing fouling using different influent waters and HFMF types. Four commonly distributed HFMFs were selected; fouling layers were developed by filtering three influent water compositions, representing LMIC/HC waters, for 10-days, and bleach, water, or vinegar backwashing solutions were used for daily backwashing. Filter performance indicators included: fiber mechanical properties (strain at break, break force), water quantity performance (flow), water quality performance (turbidity, E. coli), and imaging. The study found fouling developed rapidly and altered mechanical properties and water quantity indicators within 200 h of filtration. Fouling did not decrease water quality indicators. Backwashing improved the filter's mechanical properties and water quantity performance, but it did not fully recover the initial performance. Additionally, recovery differed between backwashing solutions, and no universal cleaning recommendation appropriate for HFMFs in LMICs/HCs was identified. Overall, fouling development and control depended on HFMF type, influent water quality, and backwashing solution type; thus, caution before distributing HFMFs for long-term use in LMICs/HCs is recommended.

Faecal contamination of the environment and child health: a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Exposure to faecal contamination is believed to be associated with child diarrhoea and possibly stunting; however, few studies have explicitly measured the association between faecal contamination and health. We aimed to assess individual participant data (IPD) across multiple trials and observational studies to quantify the relationship for common faecal-oral transmission pathways.

METHODS

We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of IPD from studies identified in an electronic search of PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase on May 21, 2018. The search was done in English, but full texts published in French, Portuguese, and Spanish were also reviewed. Eligible studies quantified (1) household-level faecal indicator bacteria concentrations along common faecal-oral transmission pathways of drinking water, soil, or food, on children's hands or fomites, or fly densities in food preparation areas; and (2) individual-level diarrhoea or linear growth measures for children younger than 5 years in low-income and middle-income countries. For the diarrhoea analysis, all definitions of diarrhoea were eligible but studies were excluded if they used a recall period longer than 7 days. For the linear growth analysis (using height-for-age Z scores [HAZ]), cross-sectional studies were excluded, because of the absence of longitudinal environmental contamination data measured before the growth outcomes. We used multilevel generalised mixed-effects models to estimate the odds ratio (OR) for diarrhoea and the difference in HAZ scores for individual studies associated with a 1-log₁₀ higher measure of faecal contamination. Estimates from each study were combined under a random-effects meta-analysis framework. The study protocol was pre-registered with PROSPERO (CRD42018102114).

FINDINGS

From 72 eligible studies, we included IPD for 20 studies in the meta-analyses, totalling 54 225 diarrhoea or linear growth observations matched to faecal indicator bacteria concentrations in drinking water, and a further 35 010 observations with faecal contamination data for the other transmission pathways. Child diarrhoea was associated with 1-log₁₀ higher faecal indicator bacteria concentrations in drinking water (OR 1·09, 95% CI 1·04 to 1·13; p=0·0002, I²=34%, 95% CI 0 to 62) and on children's hands (1·11, 1·02 to 1·22; p=0·021, I²=0%, 0 to 71). Lower HAZ scores were associated with 1-log₁₀ higher median faecal indicator bacteria concentrations in drinking water (HAZ -0·04, 95% CI -0·06 to -0·01; p=0·0054; I²=19%, 95% CI 0 to 63) and on fomites (-0·06, -0·12 to 0·00; p=0·044, I²=57%, 0 to 90).

INTERPRETATION

Although summary measures from individual studies often report little or no effect of measured faecal contamination on child health, this multi-study IPD analysis indicates that household faecal indicator bacteria concentrations are associated with important adverse health outcomes in young children. Improved direct measures of exposure and enteric pathogens could help to better characterise the relationship and inform intervention design in future studies.

FUNDING

None.

Use, Acceptability, Performance, and Health Impact of Hollow Fiber Ultrafilters for Water Treatment in Rural Kenyan Households, 2009-2011

Diarrheal illness remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in children < 5 years in developing countries, and contaminated water contributes to diarrhea risk. To address this problem, a novel hollow fiber ultrafilter (HFU) was developed for household water treatment. To test its impact on water quality and infant health, we conducted a cluster-randomized longitudinal evaluation in 10 intervention and 10 comparison villages in Kenya, attempting to enroll all households with infants (< 12 months old). We conducted a baseline survey, distributed HFUs to intervention households, made biweekly home visits for 1 year to assess water treatment practices and diarrhea in infants, and tested water samples from both groups every 2 months for Escherichia coli. We enrolled 92 infants from intervention households and 74 from comparison households. During the 1-year study period, 45.7% of intervention households and 97.3% of comparison households had at least one stored water sample test positive for E. coli. Compared with comparison households, the odds of E. coli contamination in stored water was lower for intervention households (odds ratio [OR]: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.24, 0.74), but there was no difference in the odds of reported diarrhea in infants, adjusting for covariates (OR: 1.19, 95% CI: 0.74, 1.90). Although nearly all water samples obtained from unprotected sources and filtered by the HFU were free of E. coli contamination, HFUs alone were not effective at reducing diarrhea in infants.

Wilderness Medical Society Clinical Practice Guidelines for Water Disinfection for Wilderness, International Travel, and Austere Situations

To provide guidance to clinicians, the Wilderness Medical Society convened experts to develop evidence-based guidelines for water disinfection in situations where the potability of available water is not ensured, including wilderness and international travel, areas affected by disaster, and other areas without adequate sanitation. The guidelines present the available methods for reducing or eliminating microbiologic contamination of water for individuals, groups, or households; evaluation of their effectiveness; and practical considerations. The evidence evaluation includes both laboratory and clinical publications. The panel graded the recommendations based on the quality of supporting evidence and the balance between benefits and risks or burdens, according to the criteria published by the American College of Chest Physicians.

Effects of a large-scale distribution of water filters and natural draft rocket-style cookstoves on diarrhea and acute respiratory infection: A cluster-randomized controlled trial in Western Province, Rwanda

BACKGROUND

Unsafe drinking water and household air pollution (HAP) are major causes of morbidity and mortality among children under 5 in low and middle-income countries. Household water filters and higher-efficiency biomass-burning cookstoves have been widely promoted to improve water quality and reduce fuel use, but there is limited evidence of their health effects when delivered programmatically at scale.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

In a large-scale program in Western Province, Rwanda, water filters and portable biomass-burning natural draft rocket-style cookstoves were distributed between September and December 2014 and promoted to over 101,000 households in the poorest economic quartile in 72 (of 96) randomly selected sectors in Western Province. To assess the effects of the intervention, between August and December, 2014, we enrolled 1,582 households that included a child under 4 years from 174 randomly selected village-sized clusters, half from intervention sectors and half from nonintervention sectors. At baseline, 76% of households relied primarily on an improved source for drinking water (piped, borehole, protected spring/well, or rainwater) and over 99% cooked primarily on traditional biomass-burning stoves. We conducted follow-up at 3 time-points between February 2015 and March 2016 to assess reported diarrhea and acute respiratory infections (ARIs) among children <5 years in the preceding 7 days (primary outcomes) and patterns of intervention use, drinking water quality, and air quality. The intervention reduced the prevalence of reported child diarrhea by 29% (prevalence ratio [PR] 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59-0.87, p = 0.001) and reported child ARI by 25% (PR 0.75, 95% CI 0.60-0.93, p = 0.009). Overall, more than 62% of households were observed to have water in their filters at follow-up, while 65% reported using the intervention stove every day, and 55% reported using it primarily outdoors. Use of both the intervention filter and intervention stove decreased throughout follow-up, while reported traditional stove use increased. The intervention reduced the prevalence of households with detectable fecal contamination in drinking water samples by 38% (PR 0.62, 95% CI 0.57-0.68, p < 0.0001) but had no significant impact on 48-hour personal exposure to log-transformed fine particulate matter (PM2.5) concentrations among cooks (β = -0.089, p = 0.486) or children (β = -0.228, p = 0.127). The main limitations of this trial include the unblinded nature of the intervention, limited PM2.5 exposure measurement, and a reliance on reported intervention use and reported health outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that the intervention improved household drinking water quality and reduced caregiver-reported diarrhea among children <5 years. It also reduced caregiver-reported ARI despite no evidence of improved air quality. Further research is necessary to ascertain longer-term intervention use and benefits and to explore the potential synergistic effects between diarrhea and ARI.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trials.gov NCT02239250.