Preventing diarrhoea with household ceramic water filters: Assessment of a pilot project in Bolivia
In an attempt to prevent diarrhoea in a rural community in central Bolivia, an international non-governmental organization implemented a pilot project to improve drinking water quality using gravity-fed, household-based, ceramic water filters. We assessed the performance of the filters by conducting a five-month randomized controlled trial among all 60 households in the pilot community. Water filters eliminated thermotolerant (faecal) coliforms from almost all intervention households and significantly reduced turbidity, thereby improving water aesthetics. Most importantly, the filters were associated with a 45.3% reduction in prevalence of diarrhoea among the study population (p = 0.02). After adjustment for household clustering and repeated episodes in individuals and controlling for age and baseline diarrhoea, prevalence of diarrhoea among the intervention group was 51% lower than controls, though the protective effect was only borderline significant (OR 0.49, 95% CI: 0.24, 1.01; p = 0.05). A follow-up survey conducted approximately 9 months after deployment of the filters found 67% being used regularly, 13% being used intermittently, and 21% not in use. Water samples from all regularly used filters were free of thermotolerant coliforms.
Available from: Enrique Perez Gutierrez
- "Assessments of various water treatment methods that improve water quality, and thus, potentially reduce diarrhoea have been conducted worldwide. Point of use water treatment using filters, solar energy, flocculant-disinfectant, and chlorine, as well as community hygiene education have all been shown to reduce diarrhoea to various degrees
[6-17]. However, studies have not been specifically conducted to address the problem in the northeast rural regions of Brazil, where water is not only of poor quality, but is also scarce. "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
Lack of access to safe and secure water is an international issue recognized by the United Nations. To address this problem, the One Million Cisterns Project was initiated in 2001 in Brazil’s semi-arid region to provide a sustainable source of water to households. The objectives of this study were to determine the 30-day period prevalence of diarrhoea in individuals with and without cisterns and determine symptomology, duration of illness and type of health care sought among those with diarrhoea. A subgroup analysis was also conducted among children less than five years old.
A face-to-face survey was conducted between August 20th and September 20th, 2007 in the Agreste Central Region of Pernambuco State, Brazil. Households with and without a cistern that had at least one child under the age of five years were selected using systematic convenient sampling. Differences in health outcomes between groups were assessed using Pearson’s Chi-squared and two-way t-tests. Demographic variables were tested for univariable associations with diarrhoea using logistic regression with random effects. P-values of 0.05 or less were considered statistically significant.
A total of 3679 people from 774 households were included in the analysis (1863 people from 377 households with cisterns and 1816 people from 397 households without cisterns). People from households with a cistern had a significantly lower 30-day period prevalence of diarrhoea (prevalence = 11.0%; 95% CI 9.5-12.4) than people from households without a cistern (prevalence = 18.2%; 95% CI 16.4-20.0). This significant difference was also found in a subgroup analysis of children under five years old; those children with a cistern had a 30-day period prevalence of 15.6% (95% CI 12.3-18.9) versus 26.7% (95% CI 22.8-30.6) in children without a cistern. There were no significant differences between those people with and without cisterns in terms of the types of symptoms, duration of illness and health care sought for diarrhoea.
Our results indicate that the use of cisterns for drinking water is associated with a decreased occurrence of diarrhoea in this study population. Further research accounting for additional risk factors and preventative factors should be conducted.
BMC Infectious Diseases 02/2013; 13(1):65. DOI:10.1186/1471-2334-13-65 · 2.61 Impact Factor
Available from: Mark Sobsey
- "Systematic reviews of field trials have suggested that household-based water quality interventions such as appropriate treatment and safe storage are effective in reducing diarrhoeal disease (Fewtrell et al. 2005; Clasen et al. 2006, 2007). Many technologies for POU water treatment exist and some are supported by extensive laboratory and field studies documenting effective reduction of waterborne pathogens and diarrhoeal disease in users. "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Low-cost options for the treatment of drinking water at the household level are being explored by the Cambodian government and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) working in Cambodia, where many lack access to improved drinking water sources and diarrhoeal diseases are the most prevalent cause of death in children under 5 years of age. The ceramic water purifier (CWP), a locally produced, low-cost ceramic filter, is now being implemented by several NGOs, and an estimated 100,000+households in the country now use them for drinking water treatment. Two candidate filters were tested for the reduction of bacterial and viral surrogates for waterborne pathogens using representative Cambodian drinking water sources (rainwater and surface water) spiked with Escherichia coli and bacteriophage MS2. Results indicate that filters were capable of reducing key microbes in the laboratory with mean reductions of E. coli of approximately 99% and mean reduction of bacteriophages of 90-99% over >600 litres throughput. Increased effectiveness was not observed in filters with an AgNO3 amendment. At under US$10 per filter, locally produced ceramic filters may be a promising option for drinking water treatment and safe storage at the household level.
Journal of Water and Health 03/2010; 8(1):1-10. DOI:10.2166/wh.2009.007 · 1.46 Impact Factor
- "There is also very little data on whether point-of-use devices continue to be used after the initial study period and if so whether they are used appropriately and not used beyond their period of effectiveness. Initial results on the long-term uptake of point-of-use devices are not convincing (Clasen et al. 2006b; Moser & Mosler 2008). In these authors' opinions, until many of these questions are answered, it would be premature to rely on point-of-use devices as the sole water quality intervention, unless there really is no possibility of central treatment. "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This paper reports a study of the LifeStraw in El-Masraf camp within Gezira State, Sudan. A total of 647 eligible subjects participated in the study. Two week incidence of diarrhoeal rates were estimated by a community survey some four months before and again four months after provision of the LifeStraw. In addition counts were kept of people attending at the community clinic with diarrhoea. Compliance rates were good with 86.5% of people saying they always used it and only 3.7% saying they had never used it. In a before implementation survey 16.8% of participants reported diarrhoea in the previous 2 weeks compared with only 15.3% in a survey after implementation. Similarly 58 people presented to the clinic as a new case of diarrhoea in the four months before compared with only six in the four months after implementation. When compared with diarrhoeal attendances at the regional hospital, this was a statistically significant decline in attendances (p<0.0001). The LifeStraw is likely to find a role as an adjunct to water quality interventions aimed at the home. However, more research is needed to assess the long-term impact and uptake of these devices before their definitive value can be assessed.
Journal of Water and Health 09/2009; 7(3):478-83. DOI:10.2166/wh.2009.050 · 1.46 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.