James A Fuller1, Eduardo Villamor2, William Cevallos3, James Trostle4, Joseph Ns Eisenberg5. 1. Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI, USA jafuller@umich.edu. 2. Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI, USA Center for Human Growth and Development, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 3. Centro de Biomedicina-Carrera de Medicina, Universidad Central del Ecuador, Quito, Ecuador and. 4. Department of Anthropology, Trinity College, Hartford, CT, USA. 5. Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Infectious disease interventions, such as vaccines and bed nets, have the potential to provide herd protection to non-recipients. Similarly, improved sanitation in one household may provide community-wide benefits if it reduces contamination in the shared environment. Sanitation at the household level is an important predictor of child growth, but less is known about the effect of sanitation coverage in the community. METHODS: From 2008 to 2013, we took repeated anthropometric measurements on 1314 children under 5 years of age in 24 rural Ecuadorian villages. Using mixed effects regression, we estimated the association between sanitation coverage in surrounding households and child growth. RESULTS: Sanitation coverage in the surrounding households was strongly associated with child height, as those with 100% coverage in their surroundings had a 67% lower prevalence of stunting [prevalence ratio (PR) 0.32, 95% CI 0.15-0.69] compared with those with 0% coverage. Children from households with improved sanitation had a lower prevalence of stunting (PR 0.86, 95% CI 0.64-1.15). When analysing height as a continuous outcome, the protective effect of sanitation coverage is manifested primarily among girls during the second year of life, the time at which growth faltering is most likely to occur. CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights that a household's sanitation practices can provide herd protection to the overall community. Studies which fail to account for the positive externalities that sanitation provides will underestimate the overall protective effect. Future studies could seek to identify a threshold of sanitation coverage, similar to a herd immunity threshold, to provide coverage and compliance targets.
BACKGROUND: Infectious disease interventions, such as vaccines and bed nets, have the potential to provide herd protection to non-recipients. Similarly, improved sanitation in one household may provide community-wide benefits if it reduces contamination in the shared environment. Sanitation at the household level is an important predictor of child growth, but less is known about the effect of sanitation coverage in the community. METHODS: From 2008 to 2013, we took repeated anthropometric measurements on 1314 children under 5 years of age in 24 rural Ecuadorian villages. Using mixed effects regression, we estimated the association between sanitation coverage in surrounding households and child growth. RESULTS: Sanitation coverage in the surrounding households was strongly associated with child height, as those with 100% coverage in their surroundings had a 67% lower prevalence of stunting [prevalence ratio (PR) 0.32, 95% CI 0.15-0.69] compared with those with 0% coverage. Children from households with improved sanitation had a lower prevalence of stunting (PR 0.86, 95% CI 0.64-1.15). When analysing height as a continuous outcome, the protective effect of sanitation coverage is manifested primarily among girls during the second year of life, the time at which growth faltering is most likely to occur. CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights that a household's sanitation practices can provide herd protection to the overall community. Studies which fail to account for the positive externalities that sanitation provides will underestimate the overall protective effect. Future studies could seek to identify a threshold of sanitation coverage, similar to a herd immunity threshold, to provide coverage and compliance targets.
Authors: William Checkley; Robert H Gilman; Robert E Black; Leonardo D Epstein; Lilia Cabrera; Charles R Sterling; Lawrence H Moulton Journal: Lancet Date: 2004-01-10 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Henry Wamani; Anne Nordrehaug Astrøm; Stefan Peterson; James K Tumwine; Thorkild Tylleskär Journal: BMC Pediatr Date: 2007-04-10 Impact factor: 2.125
Authors: John T Trimmer; Joyce Kisiangani; Rachel Peletz; Kara Stuart; Prince Antwi-Agyei; Jeff Albert; Ranjiv Khush; Caroline Delaire Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2022-06-08 Impact factor: 11.035
Authors: William E Oswald; Aisha Ep Stewart; Michael R Kramer; Tekola Endeshaw; Mulat Zerihun; Berhanu Melak; Eshetu Sata; Demelash Gessese; Tesfaye Teferi; Zerihun Tadesse; Birhan Guadie; Jonathan D King; Paul M Emerson; Elizabeth K Callahan; Dana Flanders; Christine L Moe; Thomas F Clasen Journal: Bull World Health Organ Date: 2017-01-26 Impact factor: 9.408
Authors: Mitsunori Odagiri; Zainal Muhammad; Aidan A Cronin; Michael E Gnilo; Aldy K Mardikanto; Khaerul Umam; Yameha T Asamou Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2017-12-14 Impact factor: 3.390