| Literature DB >> 19902801 |
Pascal O Bessong1, John O Odiyo, Justice N Musekene, Abera Tessema.
Abstract
Total microbial quality assessment and geographical information system were used for evaluating the quality of water and the spatial distribution of diarrhoea cases in Tshikuwi, a rural community in South Africa, during an outbreak of diarrhoea. The water-abstraction points included two groundwater storage tanks, namely Tank 1 and Tank 2 and the Khandanama river. Indicator microbial counts for total coliforms, faecal coliforms, enterococci, and heterotrophic bacteria exceeded the limit for no risk as stipulated by the South African water-quality guidelines for domestic use for Tank 1 and the Khandanama river. Vibrio, Salmonella, and Shigella species were prevalent in the Khandanama river. The spatial distribution of diarrhoea cases showed a hot-spot of diarrhoea cases close to Tank 1 and the Khandanama river. Results of chi-square analysis showed that the proportion of infection from each water source was different or that infection depends on the type of water source (alpha = 0.05). The demonstrated spatial clustering of diarrhoea cases might have been influenced by the poor microbial quality of water used from Tank 1 and the Khandanama river. The results further highlight the urgent need of water-treatment facilities and monitoring of water quality in rural communities of South Africa.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2009 PMID: 19902801 PMCID: PMC2928092 DOI: 10.3329/jhpn.v27i5.3642
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Health Popul Nutr ISSN: 1606-0997 Impact factor: 2.000
Fig. 1.Spatial distribution of diarrhoea cases in the Tshikuwi community, South Africa, during an outbreak of diarrhoea in June-July 2006
Microbial quality of domestic water collected from three sources used by residents of the Tshikuwi community, South Africa, during an outbreak of diarrhoea
| Water source | Date of water sampling | Faecal coliform (cfu/100 mL) | Total coliform (cfu/100 mL) Limit for no risk= 0–5 cfu/100 mL | Enterococci (cfu/100 mL) Limit for no risk= 0–5 cfu/100 mL | Heterotroph (cfu/1 mL) Limit for no risk= 0–100 cfu/mL |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tank 1 | 6 July 2006 | 50.5±5.0 | 334.0±8.5 | 25.0±5.0 | 1.02×103 |
| 29 July 2006 | 5.5±2.1 | 30.0±5.7 | 8.5±2.0 | 3.8×102 | |
| 2 October 2006 | 13.0±1.4 | 36.5±6 | 6.0±5.0 | 4.2×103 | |
| Tank 2 | 6 July 2006 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7.8×102 |
| 29 July 2006 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | |
| 2 October 2006 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 50 | |
| Khandanama river | 6 July 2006 | 107.0±12.7 | 388.0±29.7 | 63.5±6.4 | 6.1×103 |
| 29 July 2006 | 112.0±11.3 | 397.0±23.3 | 45.0±4.2 | 2.4×104 | |
| 2 October 2006 | 35.0±4.2 | 387.0±15.6 | 56.0±5.7 | 2.6×104 |
Water samples were analyzed in duplicate. The values for faecal coliforms, total coliforms, and enterococci counts are the means±standard deviations
* The limit for no risk for each of the indicator organisms is as prescribed by the South African water-quality guidelines for domestic use (5). It could be seen that, during the study period, the faecal coliform, total coliform, enterococci, and heterotrophic counts were much higher than the recommended minimum for Tank 1 and the Khandamana river. The counts for Tank 2 were within the acceptable limits, except for the heterotrophic counts