Effects of Individual and Combined Water, Sanitation, Handwashing, and Nutritional Interventions on Child Respiratory Infections in Rural Kenya: A Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial

Effect of a Homestead Food Production Program on the Prevalence of Diarrhea and Acute Respiratory Infection in Children in Sylhet, Bangladesh: A Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial

Diarrhea and respiratory illness are leading causes of mortality and morbidity among young children. We assessed the impact of a homestead food production intervention on diarrhea and acute respiratory infection (ARI) in children in Bangladesh, secondary outcomes of the Food and Agricultural Approaches to Reducing Malnutrition (FAARM) cluster-randomized trial. The trial enrolled 2,705 married women and their children 3 years or younger in 96 rural settlements (geographic clusters) in Sylhet Division, Bangladesh. The intervention promoted home gardening and poultry rearing alongside child nutrition and health counseling over 3 years (2015-2018). An 8-month food hygiene behavior change component using emotional drivers was delivered beginning in mid-2017. Caregiver-reported diarrhea and symptoms of ARI in the week preceding the survey were recorded every 2 months. We analyzed 32,460 observations of 3,276 children over 4 years and found that 3.9% of children had diarrhea and 3.4% had an ARI in the prior 7 days. There was no overall effect of the intervention on 7-day diarrhea period prevalence (odds ratio [OR], 0.92; 95% CI, 0.71-1.19), diarrhea point prevalence (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.78-1.36), or 7-day ARI period prevalence (OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.88-1.60). There was no impact on diarrhea severity or differences in health-seeking behaviors. Our findings suggest that this homestead food production program was insufficient to reduce morbidity symptoms among children in a rural setting. More comprehensive water, sanitation, and hygiene measures, and behavioral recommendations may be needed to achieve impacts on child health.

Exploring the association between household access to water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) services and common childhood diseases using data from the 2017-2018 Demographic and Health Survey in Benin: focus on diarrhoea and acute respiratory infection

OBJECTIVE

The paper aimed to study the association between household access to water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) services and the occurrence of diarrhoea and acute respiratory infection among children under 5 years in Benin.

DESIGN

We performed secondary analyses using Benin's Fifth Demographic and Health Survey datasets. The dependent variables were diarrhoea and acute respiratory infection (yes=1, no=0). Among the independent variables were the household access to individual WASH services, grouped as follows: 'basic', 'limited', 'unimproved' and 'no service'. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine the association between household access to WASH services and the occurrence of diarrhoea and acute respiratory infection. Results from the multivariate logistic regression were presented using adjusted Odds Ratios (aORs) with 95% Confidence Intervals (95% CIs).

SETTING

Benin.

PARTICIPANTS

Children under 5 years successfully surveyed during Benin's Fifth Demographic and Health Survey.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Diarrhoea and acute respiratory infection.

RESULTS

In the current study, 12 034 children under 5 years met the selection criteria and were included in the analyses. The prevalence of diarrhoea and acute respiratory infection was 10.5% (95% CI=9.8% to 11.3%) and 2.9% (95% CI=2.5% to 3.4%), respectively. Children living in households without sanitation service, that is, practising open defecation (aOR=1.9, 95% CI=1.4 to 2.6), and with unimproved (aOR=1.9, 95% CI=1.3 to 2.7) and limited (aOR=1.5, 95% CI=1.1 to 2.2) services were more likely to have diarrhoea compared with children with basic sanitation services. Household access to WASH services was not associated with acute respiratory infection.

CONCLUSION

We suggest reinforcing household access to basic sanitation services to combat diarrhoea in children under 5 years. Further research is needed on the effects of WASH interventions on diarrhoea and acute respiratory infection in children under 5 years.

Effectiveness of handwashing with soap for preventing acute respiratory infections in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Acute respiratory infection (ARI) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally, with 83% of ARI mortality occurring in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) before the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to estimate the effect of interventions promoting handwashing with soap on ARI in LMICs.

METHODS

In our systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Global Health, and Global Index Medicus for studies of handwashing with soap interventions in LMICs from inception to May 25, 2021. We included randomised and non-randomised controlled studies of interventions conducted in domestic, school, or childcare settings. Interventions promoting hand hygiene methods other than handwashing with soap were excluded, as were interventions in health-care facilities or the workplace. The primary outcome was ARI morbidity arising from any pathogen for participants of any age. Secondary outcomes were lower respiratory infection, upper respiratory infection, influenza confirmed by diagnostic test, COVID-19 confirmed by diagnostic test, and all-cause mortality. We extracted relative risks (RRs), using random-effects meta-analysis to analyse study results, and metaregression to evaluate heterogeneity. We assessed risk of bias in individual studies using an adapted Newcastle-Ottawa scale, and assessed the overall body of evidence using a Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. The study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021231414.

FINDINGS

26 studies with 161 659 participants met inclusion criteria, providing 27 comparisons (21 randomised). Interventions promoting handwashing with soap reduced any ARI compared with no handwashing intervention (RR 0·83 [95% CI 0·76-0·90], I2 88%; 27 comparisons). Interventions also reduced lower respiratory infections (0·78 [0·64-0·94], I2 64%; 12 comparisons) and upper respiratory infections (0·74 [0·59-0·93], I2 91%; seven comparisons), but not test-confirmed influenza (0·94 [0·42-2·11], I2 90%; three comparisons), test-confirmed COVID-19 (no comparisons), or all-cause mortality (prevalence ratio 0·95 [95% CI 0·71-1·27]; one comparison). For ARI, no heterogeneity covariates were significant at p<0·1 and the GRADE rating was moderate certainty evidence.

INTERPRETATION

Interventions promoting handwashing with soap can reduce ARI in LMICs, and could help to prevent the large burden of respiratory disease.

FUNDING

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Reckitt Global Hygiene Institute, and UK FCDO.

Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses

BACKGROUND

Viral epidemics or pandemics of acute respiratory infections (ARIs) pose a global threat. Examples are influenza (H1N1) caused by the H1N1pdm09 virus in 2009, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in 2003, and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by SARS-CoV-2 in 2019. Antiviral drugs and vaccines may be insufficient to prevent their spread. This is an update of a Cochrane Review last published in 2020. We include results from studies from the current COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of acute respiratory viruses.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and two trials registers in October 2022, with backwards and forwards citation analysis on the new studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs investigating physical interventions (screening at entry ports, isolation, quarantine, physical distancing, personal protection, hand hygiene, face masks, glasses, and gargling) to prevent respiratory virus transmission.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 new RCTs and cluster-RCTs (610,872 participants) in this update, bringing the total number of RCTs to 78. Six of the new trials were conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic; two from Mexico, and one each from Denmark, Bangladesh, England, and Norway. We identified four ongoing studies, of which one is completed, but unreported, evaluating masks concurrent with the COVID-19 pandemic. Many studies were conducted during non-epidemic influenza periods. Several were conducted during the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic, and others in epidemic influenza seasons up to 2016. Therefore, many studies were conducted in the context of lower respiratory viral circulation and transmission compared to COVID-19. The included studies were conducted in heterogeneous settings, ranging from suburban schools to hospital wards in high-income countries; crowded inner city settings in low-income countries; and an immigrant neighbourhood in a high-income country. Adherence with interventions was low in many studies. The risk of bias for the RCTs and cluster-RCTs was mostly high or unclear. Medical/surgical masks compared to no masks We included 12 trials (10 cluster-RCTs) comparing medical/surgical masks versus no masks to prevent the spread of viral respiratory illness (two trials with healthcare workers and 10 in the community). Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of influenza-like illness (ILI)/COVID-19 like illness compared to not wearing masks (risk ratio (RR) 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 1.09; 9 trials, 276,917 participants; moderate-certainty evidence. Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of laboratory-confirmed influenza/SARS-CoV-2 compared to not wearing masks (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.42; 6 trials, 13,919 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Harms were rarely measured and poorly reported (very low-certainty evidence). N95/P2 respirators compared to medical/surgical masks We pooled trials comparing N95/P2 respirators with medical/surgical masks (four in healthcare settings and one in a household setting). We are very uncertain on the effects of N95/P2 respirators compared with medical/surgical masks on the outcome of clinical respiratory illness (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.10; 3 trials, 7779 participants; very low-certainty evidence). N95/P2 respirators compared with medical/surgical masks may be effective for ILI (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.03; 5 trials, 8407 participants; low-certainty evidence). Evidence is limited by imprecision and heterogeneity for these subjective outcomes. The use of a N95/P2 respirators compared to medical/surgical masks probably makes little or no difference for the objective and more precise outcome of laboratory-confirmed influenza infection (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.34; 5 trials, 8407 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Restricting pooling to healthcare workers made no difference to the overall findings. Harms were poorly measured and reported, but discomfort wearing medical/surgical masks or N95/P2 respirators was mentioned in several studies (very low-certainty evidence).  One previously reported ongoing RCT has now been published and observed that medical/surgical masks were non-inferior to N95 respirators in a large study of 1009 healthcare workers in four countries providing direct care to COVID-19 patients.  Hand hygiene compared to control Nineteen trials compared hand hygiene interventions with controls with sufficient data to include in meta-analyses. Settings included schools, childcare centres and homes. Comparing hand hygiene interventions with controls (i.e. no intervention), there was a 14% relative reduction in the number of people with ARIs in the hand hygiene group (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.90; 9 trials, 52,105 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), suggesting a probable benefit. In absolute terms this benefit would result in a reduction from 380 events per 1000 people to 327 per 1000 people (95% CI 308 to 342). When considering the more strictly defined outcomes of ILI and laboratory-confirmed influenza, the estimates of effect for ILI (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.09; 11 trials, 34,503 participants; low-certainty evidence), and laboratory-confirmed influenza (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.30; 8 trials, 8332 participants; low-certainty evidence), suggest the intervention made little or no difference. We pooled 19 trials (71, 210 participants) for the composite outcome of ARI or ILI or influenza, with each study only contributing once and the most comprehensive outcome reported. Pooled data showed that hand hygiene may be beneficial with an 11% relative reduction of respiratory illness (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.94; low-certainty evidence), but with high heterogeneity. In absolute terms this benefit would result in a reduction from 200 events per 1000 people to 178 per 1000 people (95% CI 166 to 188). Few trials measured and reported harms (very low-certainty evidence). We found no RCTs on gowns and gloves, face shields, or screening at entry ports.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The high risk of bias in the trials, variation in outcome measurement, and relatively low adherence with the interventions during the studies hampers drawing firm conclusions. There were additional RCTs during the pandemic related to physical interventions but a relative paucity given the importance of the question of masking and its relative effectiveness and the concomitant measures of mask adherence which would be highly relevant to the measurement of effectiveness, especially in the elderly and in young children. There is uncertainty about the effects of face masks. The low to moderate certainty of evidence means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited, and that the true effect may be different from the observed estimate of the effect. The pooled results of RCTs did not show a clear reduction in respiratory viral infection with the use of medical/surgical masks. There were no clear differences between the use of medical/surgical masks compared with N95/P2 respirators in healthcare workers when used in routine care to reduce respiratory viral infection. Hand hygiene is likely to modestly reduce the burden of respiratory illness, and although this effect was also present when ILI and laboratory-confirmed influenza were analysed separately, it was not found to be a significant difference for the latter two outcomes. Harms associated with physical interventions were under-investigated. There is a need for large, well-designed RCTs addressing the effectiveness of many of these interventions in multiple settings and populations, as well as the impact of adherence on effectiveness, especially in those most at risk of ARIs.

A Community Health Worker-Based Intervention on Anthropometric Outcomes of Children Aged 3 to 21 Months in Urban Pakistan, 2019-2021

Objectives. To evaluate the impact of a community health worker-based "in-home growth monitoring with counseling" (IHGMC) intervention on anthropometric outcomes in Pakistan, where 38% of children younger than 5 years are stunted. Methods. We used an individual, single-blind, step-wedge randomized controlled trial and a pure control group recruited at endline. We based the analysis on an intention-to-treat estimation using the coarsened exact matching (CEM) method for sample selection among treatments and the control. We conducted the baseline in July 2019 and completed endline in September-October 2021. We recruited 1639 households (treated: 1188; control: 451) with children aged 3 to 21 months who were residing in an urban informal settlement area. The CEM sample used for analysis numbered 1046 (treated: 636; control: 410). The intervention continued for 6 months. Results. Compared with the control group, the height-for-age z-score in the IHGMC group increased by 0.58 SD (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.33, 0.83; P = .001) and the weight-for-age z-score by 0.43 SD (95% CI = 0.20, 0.67; P < .01), measured at endline. Conclusions. IHGMC substantially improved child anthropometric outcomes in disadvantaged localities, and this impact persisted during the COVID-19 pandemic. Trial Registration. AER-RCT registry (AEARCTR-0003248). (Am J Public Health. 2023;113(1):105-114. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2022.307111).

Evaluation of an on-site sanitation intervention against childhood diarrhea and acute respiratory infection 1 to 3.5 years after implementation: Extended follow-up of a cluster-randomized controlled trial in rural Bangladesh

BACKGROUND

Diarrhea and acute respiratory infection (ARI) are leading causes of death in children. The WASH Benefits Bangladesh trial implemented a multicomponent sanitation intervention that led to a 39% reduction in the prevalence of diarrhea among children and a 25% reduction for ARI, measured 1 to 2 years after intervention implementation. We measured longer-term intervention effects on these outcomes between 1 to 3.5 years after intervention implementation, including periods with differing intensity of behavioral promotion.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

WASH Benefits Bangladesh was a cluster-randomized controlled trial of water, sanitation, hygiene, and nutrition interventions (NCT01590095). The sanitation intervention included provision of or upgrades to improved latrines, sani-scoops for feces removal, children's potties, and in-person behavioral promotion. Promotion was intensive up to 2 years after intervention initiation, decreased in intensity between years 2 to 3, and stopped after 3 years. Access to and reported use of latrines was high in both arms, and latrine quality was significantly improved by the intervention, while use of child feces management tools was low. We enrolled a random subset of households from the sanitation and control arms into a longitudinal substudy, which measured child health with quarterly visits between 1 to 3.5 years after intervention implementation. The study period therefore included approximately 1 year of high-intensity promotion, 1 year of low-intensity promotion, and 6 months with no promotion. We assessed intervention effects on diarrhea and ARI prevalence among children <5 years through intention-to-treat analysis using generalized linear models with robust standard errors. Masking was not possible during data collection, but data analysis was masked. We enrolled 720 households (360 per arm) from the parent trial and made 9,800 child observations between June 2014 and December 2016. Over the entire study period, diarrheal prevalence was lower among children in the sanitation arm (11.9%) compared to the control arm (14.5%) (prevalence ratio [PR] = 0.81, 95% CI 0.66, 1.00, p = 0.05; prevalence difference [PD] = -0.027, 95% CI -0.053, 0, p = 0.05). ARI prevalence did not differ between sanitation (21.3%) and control (22.7%) arms (PR = 0.93, 95% CI 0.82, 1.05, p = 0.23; PD = -0.016, 95% CI -0.043, 0.010, p = 0.23). There were no significant differences in intervention effects between periods with high-intensity versus low-intensity/no promotion. Study limitations include use of caregiver-reported symptoms to define health outcomes and limited data collected after promotion ceased.

CONCLUSIONS

The observed effect of the WASH Benefits Bangladesh sanitation intervention on diarrhea in children appeared to be sustained for at least 3.5 years after implementation, including 1.5 years after heavy promotion ceased. Existing latrine access was high in the study setting, suggesting that improving on-site latrine quality can deliver health benefits when latrine use practices are in place. Further work is needed to understand how latrine adoption can be achieved and sustained in settings with low existing access and how sanitation programs can adopt transformative approaches of excreta management, including safe disposal of child and animal feces, to generate a hygienic home environment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT01590095; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01590095.

Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene and Nutritional Risk Factors for Acute Respiratory Illness in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: REDUCE Prospective Cohort Study

The objective of this cohort study was to examine the prevalence of acute respiratory illness among children under 5 years of age and to identify water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) and nutritional risk factors. This prospective cohort study was conducted in Walungu Territory, South Kivu, and Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), and enrolled 512 participants. Spot checks of the household environment were conducted at baseline. Baseline minimum dietary diversity (MDD) was defined by consumption of five or more of the following food groups: 1) breast milk; 2) grains, roots, and tubers; 3) legumes and nuts; 4) dairy products; 5) flesh foods; 6) eggs; 7) vitamin A rich fruits and vegetables; and 8) other fruits and vegetables. Acute respiratory illness was defined as caregiver reported rapid breathing, difficulty breathing, lower chest wall in drawing, or coughing in the previous 2 weeks obtained at a 6-month follow-up based on the use of this definition in previous studies in Bangladesh and Kenya. A total of 58% of children had acute respiratory illness, 19% had soap present in the cooking area, and 4% in the defecation area, and 21% of children met MDD. A decreased odds of acute respiratory illness was associated with soap being present in the cooking area (odds ratio [OR]: 0.49, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.38-0.88) and MDD (OR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.38-1.00). These findings highlight the need for interventions targeting hygiene and improved dietary diversity among rural DRC households to reduce the rate of respiratory illnesses in children under 5 years.

Effects of a Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Mobile Health Program on Respiratory Illness in Bangladesh: A Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial of the CHoBI7 Mobile Health Program

Acute respiratory infections are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality among young children globally. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of the Cholera-Hospital-Based-Intervention-for-7-days (CHoBI7) handwashing with soap and water treatment mobile health (mHealth) program on respiratory illness among diarrhea patients and their household members in urban Dhaka, Bangladesh. A cluster-randomized controlled trial of the CHoBI7 mHealth program was conducted among diarrhea patient households in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Patients were randomized to three arms: standard recommendation on oral rehydration solution use, health facility delivery of CHoBI7 plus mHealth (weekly voice and text messages for 12 months) (no home visits), and health facility delivery of CHoBI7 plus two home visits and mHealth. Respiratory symptoms were assessed during monthly clinical surveillance over the 12-month surveillance period. Respiratory illness was defined as rapid breathing, difficulty breathing, wheezing, or coughing. Two thousand six hundred twenty-six participants in 769 households were randomly allocated to three arms: 849 participants to the standard message arm, 886 to the mHealth with no home visits arm, and 891 to the mHealth with two home visits arm. Compared with the standard message arm, participants in the mHealth with no home visits arm (Prevalence Ratio [PR]: 0.89 [95% CI: 0.80, 0.98]), and the mHealth with two home visits arm (PR: 0.89 [95% CI: 0.81, 0.99]) had significantly lower respiratory illness prevalence over the 12-month program period. Our findings demonstrate that the CHoBI7 mHealth program is effective in reducing respiratory illness among diarrhea patient households.