| Literature DB >> 27820821 |
Hans J Overgaard1,2,3, Neal Alexander4, Maria Ines Matiz5, Juan Felipe Jaramillo5, Victor Alberto Olano5, Sandra Vargas5, Diana Sarmiento5, Audrey Lenhart6,7, Thor Axel Stenström8.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: As many neglected tropical diseases are co-endemic and have common risk factors, integrated control can efficiently reduce disease burden and relieve resource-strained public health budgets. Diarrheal diseases and dengue fever are major global health problems sharing common risk factors in water storage containers. Where provision of clean water is inadequate, water storage is crucial. Fecal contamination of stored water is a common source of diarrheal illness, but stored water also provides breeding sites for dengue vector mosquitoes. Integrating improved water management and educational strategies for both diseases in the school environment can potentially improve the health situation for students and the larger community. The objective of this trial was to investigate whether interventions targeting diarrhea and dengue risk factors would significantly reduce absence due to diarrheal disease and dengue entomological risk factors in schools. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPALEntities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27820821 PMCID: PMC5098800 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0005106
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis ISSN: 1935-2727
Fig 1Flow diagram.
Intervention assignment and follow-up analysis of schools and pupils in La Mesa and Anapoima municipalities in Cundinamarca department, Colombia.
Baseline characteristics of 35 rural primary schools allocated to four arms receiving either diarrhea (DIA), dengue (DEN), both (DIADEN), or no interventions (CON) in Anapoima and La Mesa municipalities, Colombia in 2011.
| Variable | DIA | DEN | DIADEN | CON |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Altitudinal range (m.a.s.l.) | 908–1350 | 712–1610 | 592–1093 | 588–1569 |
| Total no. of teachers | 13 | 10 | 10 | 11 |
| Pupils per teacher | 17 | 19 | 19 | 19 |
| Total no. of classrooms (incl. computer rooms) | 39 | 39 | 41 | 38 |
| Male/female ratio | 1.2 | 1.2 | 1.3 | 1.4 |
| Mean pupil age (in years) (SD) | 8.5 (2.2) | 8.2 (2.2) | 7.9 (2.1) | 8.0 (2.2) |
| Age range | 5–16 | 4–13 | 4–13 | 5–14 |
| Degree of isolation (based on no. of nearby houses) | ||||
| No. of completely isolated schools | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| No. of schools with a few (1–5) nearby houses | 5 | 8 | 7 | 4 |
| No. of schools with many (>5) nearby houses | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| School Index, SI (%) | 12.5 / 12.5 | 20.0 / 10.0 | 25.0 / 37.5 | 12.5 / 25.0 |
| Container Index, CI (%) | 2.5 / 6.1 | 4.4 / 3.1 | 9.4 / 6.9 | 3.2 / 10.0 |
| Breteau Index, BI | 12.5 / 37.5 | 20.0 / 20.0 | 37.5 / 50.0 | 12.5 / 62.5 |
| Pupae per person | 0 / 0.004 | 0 / 0 | 0.03/ 0.005 | 0.03 / 0.09 |
| Proportion of schools with female | 12.5 / 62.5 | 22.2 / 22.2 | 50.0 / 62.5 | 44.4 / 44.4 |
| Adult index (female | 1.05 / 0.71 | 0.53 / 0.47 | 0.73 / 2.79 | 0 / 1.12 |
| Schools with municipal water supply connection (%) | 8 | 19 | 13 | 10 |
| Schools with local water supply connection (%) | 74 | 66 | 32 | 53 |
| Schools using rain water (%) | 33 | 25 | 71 | 40 |
| Schools with daily water supply | 54 | 34 | 29 | 50 |
| Schools that boil drinking water (%) | 80 | 85 | 90 | 97 |
| Schools with water connection in kitchen (for food preparation) (%) | 92 | 75 | 84 | 90 |
| Schools with water connection in sinks (for hand washing and drinking purposes) (%) | 44 | 77 | 71 | 83 |
| Schools with water connection in toilets (%) | 77 | 63 | 52 | 83 |
| Samples | 56 | 59 | 76 | 76 |
| Mean | 1.2 (0.6–1.7) | 1.7 (1.0–2.4) | 1.2 (0.7–1.6) | 0.9 (0.5–1.3) |
a Degree of isolation. Number of nearby houses, i.e. within approximately 100 m from the perimeter of the school. One school in the DIA arm was closed in the beginning of the project and was removed. Therefore, the number of schools in the arm does not correspond to the original number.
b Dry season: July-September 2011, rainy season: October-November 2011. School Index = % of schools positive of immature Ae. aegypti, Container Index = % of containers positive of immature Ae. aegypti, Breteau Index = no. of containers positive of immature Ae. aegypti per 100 schools, Pupae per person = no. of Ae. aegypti pupae per person.
c A daily water supply could also mean supply during parts of the day.
d Water samples collected in May-Jun 2011 from all drinking water tanks and taps (in kitchen, sinks, and water storage tanks).
SD = standard deviation. CFU = colony forming units. CI = confidence interval.
Pupil school absence (%) in rural primary schools in four arms receiving either diarrhea (DIA), dengue (DEN), both (DIADEN), or no intervention (CON) in Anapoima and La Mesa municipalities, Colombia, 2012–2013.
| Absence reason | DIA | DEN | DIADEN | CON |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Illness | 24.5 | 21.4 | 28.4 | 24.6 |
| Family reasons | 13.1 | 17.0 | 13.9 | 16.5 |
| Travel (out of study area) | 13.7 | 14.3 | 11.7 | 12.4 |
| Medical / dental appointment | 15.2 | 12.5 | 18.1 | 9.7 |
| Lack of motivation | 10.0 | 13.8 | 8.6 | 13.2 |
| Transport problems | 11.2 | 10.1 | 8.0 | 10.3 |
| No information on reason given | 3.3 | 2.7 | 3.1 | 1.9 |
| Inadequate school uniform / suspended | 1.3 | 1.6 | 1.5 | 3.5 |
| Other | 7.6 | 6.5 | 6.5 | 7.8 |
a Family commitments, sick mother, no-one to accompany the child to school, taking care of home or siblings, bereavement or other family misfortune, family dysfunction.
b Adverse weather conditions, distance to school, lack of money for transport.
c Including: overslept, stayed at grandparents, move to another house, religious festivities, did not know there was class, adapting to school (for very small children).
Effect on primary and secondary outcomes of respective intervention in rural primary schools in arms receiving either diarrhea (DIA), dengue (DEN), both (DIADEN), or no intervention (CON) in Anapoima and La Mesa municipalities, Colombia, 2012–2013.
| DIA | DEN | DIADEN | CON | Effect of intervention of interest | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of schools | 8 | 10 | 8 | 8 | Diarrhea | Dengue |
| 0.13 | 0.12 | 0.13 | 0.08 | 0.03 | ||
| (0–0.36) | (0–0.37) | (0.03–0.49) | (0–0.27) | (-0.05–0.12), | ||
| 0.45 | ||||||
| 0.23 | 0.17 | 0.33 | 0.22 | 0.09 | ||
| (0–0.60) | (0–0.52) | (0.03–0.98) | (0–0.79) | (-0.1–0.28), | ||
| 0.32 | ||||||
| 1.37 | 1.38 | 2.27 | 1.79 | 1.01 | ||
| (0–6.41) | (0–6.78) | (0.22–6.44) | (0–7.40) | (0.23–4.39) | ||
| 0.99 | ||||||
| 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.001 | ||
| (0–0.05) | (0–0.07) | (0–0.09) | (0–0.10) | (-0.02–0.02), | ||
| 0.93 | ||||||
| 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.09 | 0.12 | -0.01 | ||
| (0–0.25) | (0–0.37) | (0–0.52) | (0–0.79) | (-0.13–0.10), | ||
| 0.81 | ||||||
| 37.5 | 10.8 | 6.25 | 46.9 | 0.22 | ||
| (0–150) | (0–50) | (0–25) | (0–150) | (0.06–0.84), | ||
| 0.03 | ||||||
a Rate difference for absenteeism outcomes; rate ratio for entomological outcomes
bBetween-cluster coefficient of variation = 1.0
cBetween-cluster coefficient of variation = 1.3
CI = confidence interval.
Fig 2Effect of interventions on Breteau indices.
Mean Breteau indices (horizontal bars with number) in rural primary schools in four arms receiving either diarrhea (DIA), dengue (DEN), both (DIADEN), or no intervention (CON). Each plot symbol is one school (circles = Anapoima, triangles = La Mesa. The dengue interventions reduced the mean Breteau Index by 78% (ratio 0.22, 95% confidence interval 0.06–0.84, p = 0.029).
Fig 3Breteau indices over time.
Variation in Breteau index in rural primary schools in four arms receiving either diarrhea (DIA), dengue (DEN), both (DIADEN), or no intervention (CONTROL) in Anapoima and La Mesa municipalities, Colombia. Rainfall is bimodal with peaks in April-May and October-November.
Outcomes of entomological indices, values are mean (range) of values over four collection points, in rural primary schools in study arms receiving diarrhea (DIA), dengue (DEN), both (DIADEN), or no intervention (CON) in Anapoima and La Mesa municipalities, Colombia, 2012–2013.
| Index | DIA | DEN | DIADEN | CON |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of schools | 8 | 10 | 8 | 8 |
| School index, SI (%) | 21.9 (12.5–37.5) | 10.5 (0–20) | 6.5 (0–25) | 27.3(22.2–37.5) |
| Container index, CI (%) | 7.5 (2.1–18.5) | 2.2 (0–5.4) | 1.1 (0–3.8) | 7.1 (5.3–13.5) |
| Pupae per person | 0.18 (0.005–2.2) | 0.04 (0–0.7) | 0.05 (0–0.6) | 0.36 (0.3–2.6) |
| Proportion of schools with female | 34.4 (25.0–50.0) | 31.6 (20.0–44.4) | 51.6 (37.5–75.0) | 42.4 (25.0–50.0) |
aTheoretical threshold levels of 0.5–1.5 Ae. aegypti pupae per person considered risk for dengue transmission [66].
Fig 4Effect of interventions on water quality.
Mean E. coli concentration in drinking water storage containers, taps and water filters (horizontal bars with number) in rural primary schools in four arms receiving either diarrhea (DIA), dengue (DEN), both (DIADEN), or no intervention (CON). Each plot symbol is one school (circles = Anapoima, triangles = La Mesa). Numbers below graph show no. of E. coli positive containers/no. of sampled containers (percent positive containers). The diarrhea interventions reduced the Williams mean colony forming units (CFU) by 78% (ratio 0.22, 95% confidence interval 0.07–0.65, p = 0.008).