Dataset Information

Extent of Fecal Contamination of Household Drinking Water in Nepal: Further Analysis of Nepal Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey 2014.

ABSTRACT: Water sources classified as "improved" may not necessarily provide safe drinking water for householders. We analyzed data from Nepal Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey 2014 to explore the extent of fecal contamination of household drinking water. Fecal contamination was detected in 81.2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 77.9-84.2) household drinking water from improved sources and 89.6% (95% CI: 80.4-94.7) in water samples from unimproved sources. In adjusted analysis, there was no difference in odds of fecal contamination of household drinking water between improved and unimproved sources. We observed significantly lower odds of fecal contamination of drinking water in households in higher wealth quintiles, where soap and water were available for handwashing and in households employing water treatment. The extent of contamination of drinking water as observed in this study highlights the huge amount of effort required to ensure the provision of safely managed water in Nepal by 2030 as aimed in sustainable development goals.

SUBMITTER: Kandel P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5303051 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Extent of Fecal Contamination of Household Drinking Water in Nepal: Further Analysis of Nepal Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey 2014.

Kandel Pragya P Kunwar Ritu R Lamichhane Prabhat P Karki Surendra S

The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene 20161107 2

Water sources classified as "improved" may not necessarily provide safe drinking water for householders. We analyzed data from Nepal Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey 2014 to explore the extent of fecal contamination of household drinking water. Fecal contamination was detected in 81.2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 77.9-84.2) household drinking water from improved sources and 89.6% (95% CI: 80.4-94.7) in water samples from unimproved sources. In adjusted analysis, there was no difference in od ...[more]

PMID: 27821687

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) set an ambitious new benchmark for safely managed drinking water services (SMDWs), but many countries lack national data on the availability and quality of drinking water.ObjectivesWe quantified the availability and microbiological quality of drinking water, monitored SMDWs, and examined risk factors for Escherichia coli (E. coli) contamination in 27 low-and middle-income countries (LMICs).MethodsA new water quality module for household surveys was implemented in 27 Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys. Teams used portable equipment to measure E. coli at the point of collection (PoC, n=61,170) and at the point of use (PoU, n=64,900) and asked respondents about the availability and accessibility of drinking water. Households were classified as having SMDW services if they used an improved water source that was free of E. coli contamination at PoC, accessible on premises, and available when needed. Compliance with individual SMDW criteria was also assessed. Modified Poisson regression was used to explore household and community risk factors for E. coli contamination.ResultsE. coli was commonly detected at the PoC (range 16-90%) and was more likely at the PoU (range 19-99%). On average, 84% of households used an improved drinking water source, and 31% met all of the SMDW criteria. E. coli contamination was the primary reason SMDW criteria were not met (15 of 27 countries). The prevalence of E. coli in PoC samples was lower among households using improved water sources [risk ratio (RR)=0.74; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.64, 0.85] but not for households with water accessible on premises (RR=0.99; 95% CI: 0.94, 1.05) or available when needed (RR=0.95; 95% CI: 0.88, 1.02). E. coli contamination of PoU samples was less common for households in the richest vs. poorest wealth quintile (RR=0.70; 95% CI: 0.55, 0.88) and in communities with high (>75%) improved sanitation coverage (RR=0.94; 95% CI: 0.90, 0.97). Livestock ownership (RR=1.08; 95% CI: 1.04, 1.13), rural vs. urban residence (RR=1.10; 95% CI: 1.04, 1.16), and wet vs. dry season sampling (RR=1.07; 95% CI: 1.01, 1.15) were positively associated with contamination at the PoU.DiscussionCross-sectional water quality data can be collected in household surveys and can be used to assess inequalities in service levels, to track the SDG indicator of SMDWs, and to examine risk factors for contamination. There is an urgent need for better risk management to reduce widespread exposure to fecal contamination through drinking water services in LMICs. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP8459.

Project description:Exposure to fecal contamination in public areas, especially in dense, urban environments, may significantly contribute to enteric infection risk. This study examined associations between sanitation and fecal contamination in public environments in four low-income neighborhoods in Accra, Ghana. Soil (n = 72) and open drain (n = 90) samples were tested for E. coli, adenovirus, and norovirus. Sanitation facilities in surveyed households (n = 793) were categorized by onsite fecal sludge containment ("contained" vs. "uncontained") using previous Joint Monitoring Program infrastructure guidelines. Most sanitation facilities were shared by multiple households. Associations between spatial clustering of household sanitation coverage and fecal contamination were examined, controlling for neighborhood and population density (measured as enumeration areas in the 2010 census and spatially matched to sample locations). E. coli concentrations in drains within 50m of clusters of contained household sanitation were more than 3 log-units lower than those outside of clusters. Further, although results were not always statistically significant, E. coli concentrations in drains showed consistent trends with household sanitation coverage clusters: concentrations were lower in or near clusters of high coverage of household sanitation facilities-especially contained facilities-and vice versa. Virus detection in drains and E. coli concentrations in soil were not significantly associated with clustering of any type of household sanitation and did not exhibit consistent trends. Population density alone was not significantly associated with any of the fecal contamination outcomes by itself and was a significant, yet inconsistent, effect modifier of the association between sanitation clusters and E. coli concentrations. These findings suggest clustering of contained household sanitation, even when shared, may be associated with lower levels of fecal contamination within drains in the immediate public domain. Further research is needed to better quantify these relationships and examine impacts on health.

Project description:BackgroundAccess to safe drinking-water is a fundamental requirement for good health and is also a human right. Global access to safe drinking-water is monitored by WHO and UNICEF using as an indicator "use of an improved source," which does not account for water quality measurements. Our objectives were to determine whether water from "improved" sources is less likely to contain fecal contamination than "unimproved" sources and to assess the extent to which contamination varies by source type and setting.Methods and findingsStudies in Chinese, English, French, Portuguese, and Spanish were identified from online databases, including PubMed and Web of Science, and grey literature. Studies in low- and middle-income countries published between 1990 and August 2013 that assessed drinking-water for the presence of Escherichia coli or thermotolerant coliforms (TTC) were included provided they associated results with a particular source type. In total 319 studies were included, reporting on 96,737 water samples. The odds of contamination within a given study were considerably lower for "improved" sources than "unimproved" sources (odds ratio [OR] = 0.15 [0.10-0.21], I2 = 80.3% [72.9-85.6]). However over a quarter of samples from improved sources contained fecal contamination in 38% of 191 studies. Water sources in low-income countries (OR = 2.37 [1.52-3.71]; p<0.001) and rural areas (OR = 2.37 [1.47-3.81] p<0.001) were more likely to be contaminated. Studies rarely reported stored water quality or sanitary risks and few achieved robust random selection. Safety may be overestimated due to infrequent water sampling and deterioration in quality prior to consumption.ConclusionAccess to an "improved source" provides a measure of sanitary protection but does not ensure water is free of fecal contamination nor is it consistent between source types or settings. International estimates therefore greatly overstate use of safe drinking-water and do not fully reflect disparities in access. An enhanced monitoring strategy would combine indicators of sanitary protection with measures of water quality.

Dataset Information

Extent of Fecal Contamination of Household Drinking Water in Nepal: Further Analysis of Nepal Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey 2014.

Publications

Extent of Fecal Contamination of Household Drinking Water in Nepal: Further Analysis of Nepal Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey 2014.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets