Public Awareness of and Support for the Use of Wastewater for SARS-CoV-2 Monitoring: A Community Survey in Louisville, Kentucky

Towards the outbreak tail, what is the public opinion about wastewater surveillance in the United States?

National opinions on a wide variety of public health topics can change over time and have highly contextual nuances. This study is a follow-up to prior inquiries into the knowledge of wastewater-based epidemiology, privacy concerns surrounding sample collection, and the use of data acquired, along with privacy awareness from an online survey conducted in the metropolitan United States during the winter of 2023. Mentions of wastewater-surveillance-related terms in the media remained common. Towards the outbreak tail in 2023, public support for surveillance of toxins (91%), diseases (91%), terrorist threats (87%), illicit drugs (70%), prescription medications (69%), and gun residue (60%) remained high. There was less support for surveillance of alcohol consumption (49%), mental illness (46%), healthy eating (37%), and lifestyle behaviors (35%). In terms of geographic scale, most respondents supported citywide surveillance (85%) with markedly lower levels of support for smaller (less anonymous) geographic scales covered by specific locations. Wastewater surveillance does not receive the public pushback that other COVID-19-related health system actors have witnessed. Instead, the public supports the expansion of wastewater surveillance as a standard to complement public health tools in other areas of health protection.

Structured Ethical Review for Wastewater-Based Testing in Support of Public Health

Wastewater-based testing (WBT) for SARS-CoV-2 has rapidly expanded over the past three years due to its ability to provide a comprehensive measurement of disease prevalence independent of clinical testing. The development and simultaneous application of WBT measured biomarkers for research activities and for the pursuit of public health goals, both areas with well-established ethical frameworks. Currently, WBT practitioners do not employ a standardized ethical review process, introducing the potential for adverse outcomes for WBT professionals and community members. To address this deficiency, an interdisciplinary workshop developed a framework for a structured ethical review of WBT. The workshop employed a consensus approach to create this framework as a set of 11 questions derived from primarily public health guidance. This study retrospectively applied these questions to SARS-CoV-2 monitoring programs covering the emergent phase of the pandemic (3/2020-2/2022 (n = 53)). Of note, 43% of answers highlight a lack of reported information to assess. Therefore, a systematic framework would at a minimum structure the communication of ethical considerations for applications of WBT. Consistent application of an ethical review will also assist in developing a practice of updating approaches and techniques to reflect the concerns held by both those practicing and those being monitored by WBT supported programs.

Structured Ethical Review for Wastewater-Based Testing

Wastewater-based testing (WBT) for SARS-CoV-2 has rapidly expanded over the past three years due to its ability to provide a comprehensive measurement of disease prevalence independent of clinical testing. The development and simultaneous application of the field blurred the boundary between measuring biomarkers for research activities and for pursuit of public health goals, both areas with well-established ethical frameworks. Currently, WBT practitioners do not employ a standardized ethical review process (or associated data management safeguards), introducing the potential for adverse outcomes for WBT professionals and community members. To address this deficiency, an interdisciplinary group developed a framework for a structured ethical review of WBT. The workshop employed a consensus approach to create this framework as a set of 11-questions derived from primarily public health guidance because of the common exemption of wastewater samples to human subject research considerations. This study retrospectively applied the set of questions to peer- reviewed published reports on SARS-CoV-2 monitoring campaigns covering the emergent phase of the pandemic from March 2020 to February 2022 (n=53). Overall, 43% of the responses to the questions were unable to be assessed because of lack of reported information. It is therefore hypothesized that a systematic framework would at a minimum improve the communication of key ethical considerations for the application of WBT. Consistent application of a standardized ethical review will also assist in developing an engaged practice of critically applying and updating approaches and techniques to reflect the concerns held by both those practicing and being monitored by WBT supported campaigns.

Abstract Figure

Synopsis

Development of a structured ethical review facilitates retrospective analysis of published studies and drafted scenarios in the context of wastewater-based testing.

Online dashboards for SARS-CoV-2 wastewater data need standard best practices: An environmental health communication agenda

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the benefits of wastewater surveillance to supplement clinical data. Numerous online information dashboards have been rapidly, and typically independently, developed to communicate environmental surveillance data to public health officials and the public. In this study, we review dashboards presenting SARS-CoV-2 wastewater data and propose a path toward harmonization and improved risk communication. A list of 127 dashboards representing 27 countries was compiled. The variability was high and encompassed aspects including the graphics used for data presentation (e.g., line/bar graphs, maps, and tables), log versus linear scale, and 96 separate ways of labeling SARS-CoV-2 wastewater concentrations. Globally, dashboard presentations also differed by region. Approximately half of the dashboards presented clinical case data, and 25% presented variant monitoring. Only 30% of dashboards provided downloadable source data. While any single dashboard is likely useful in its own context and locality, the high variation across dashboards at best prevents optimal use of wastewater surveillance data on a broader geographical scale and at worst could lead to risk communication issues and the potential for public health miscommunication. There is a great opportunity to improve scientific communication through the adoption of uniform data presentation conventions, standards, and best practices in this field.

Nationwide public perceptions regarding the acceptance of using wastewater for community health monitoring in the United States

To assess the levels of infection across communities during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, researchers have measured severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 RNA in feces dissolved in sewer water. This activity is colloquially known as sewer monitoring and is referred to as wastewater-based epidemiology in academic settings. Although global ethical principles have been described, sewer monitoring is unregulated for health privacy protection when used for public health surveillance in the United States. This study used Qualtrics XM, a national research panel provider, to recruit participants to answer an online survey. Respondents (N = 3,083) answered questions about their knowledge, perceptions of what is to be monitored, where monitoring should occur, and privacy concerns related to sewer monitoring as a public health surveillance tool. Furthermore, a privacy attitude questionnaire was used to assess the general privacy boundaries of respondents. Participants were more likely to support monitoring for diseases (92%), environmental toxins (92%), and terrorist threats (88%; e.g., anthrax). Two-third of the respondents endorsed no prohibition on location sampling scale (e.g., monitoring single residence to entire community was acceptable); the most common location category respondents wanted to prohibit sampling was at personal residences. Sewer monitoring is an emerging technology, and our study sheds light on perceptions that could benefit from educational programs in areas where public acceptance is comparatively lower. Respondents clearly communicated guard rails for sewer monitoring, and public opinion should inform future policy, application, and regulation measures.

Wastewater treatment plant operators report high capacity to support wastewater surveillance for COVID-19 across New York State, USA

Wastewater surveillance for infectious disease expanded greatly during the COVID-19 pandemic. As a collaboration between sanitation engineers and scientists, the most cost-effective deployment of wastewater surveillance routinely tests wastewater samples from wastewater treatment plants. To evaluate the capacity of treatment plants of different sizes and characteristics to participate in surveillance efforts, we developed and distributed a survey to New York State municipal treatment plant supervisors in the summer and fall of 2021. The goal of the survey was to assess the knowledge, capacity, and attitudes toward wastewater surveillance as a public health tool. Our objectives were to: (1) determine what treatment plant operators know about wastewater surveillance for public health; (2) assess how plant operators feel about the affordability and benefits of wastewater surveillance; and (3) determine how frequently plant personnel can take and ship samples using existing resources. Results show that 62% of respondents report capacity to take grab samples twice weekly. Knowledge about wastewater surveillance was mixed with most supervisors knowing that COVID-19 can be tracked via wastewater but having less knowledge about surveillance for other public health issues such as opioids. We found that attitudes toward wastewater testing for public health were directly associated with differences in self-reported capacity of the plant to take samples. Further, findings suggest a diverse capacity for sampling across sewer systems with larger treatment plants reporting greater capacity for more frequent sampling. Findings provide guidance for outreach activities as well as important insight into treatment plant sampling capacity as it is connected to internal factors such as size and resource availability. These may help public health departments understand the limitations and ability of wastewater surveillance for public health benefit.