| Literature DB >> 30742614 |
Lauren Steinbaum1,2, John Mboya3, Ryan Mahoney4, Sammy M Njenga5, Clair Null4,6, Amy J Pickering1,7.
Abstract
Improved sanitation has been associated with a reduced prevalence of soil-transmitted helminth (STH) infection and has been hypothesized to prevent fecal contamination from spreading throughout the household environment. We evaluated the effect of providing households with a pit latrine with a plastic slab and drophole cover, child feces management tools, and associated behavioral messaging on reducing STH eggs in household soil. We collected soil samples from 2107 households (898 control and 1209 improved sanitation intervention households) that were enrolled in the WASH Benefits cluster randomized controlled trial in rural Kenya and performed a post-intervention analysis after two years of intervention exposure. Following a pre-specified analysis plan, we combined all households that received the sanitation intervention into one group for comparison to control households. The prevalence of STH eggs in soil was 18.9% in control households and 17.0% in intervention households. The unadjusted prevalence ratio of total STH eggs in the intervention groups compared to the control group was 0.94 (95% CI: 0.78-1.13). The geometric mean concentration was 0.05 eggs/g dry soil in control households and intervention households. Unadjusted and adjusted models gave similar results. We found use of a shared latrine, presence of a roof over the sampling area, and the number of dogs owned at baseline was associated with an increased prevalence of STH eggs in soil; the presence of a latrine that was at least 2 years old and a latrine with a covered drophole was associated with a reduction in the prevalence of STH eggs in soil. Soil moisture content was also associated with an increased prevalence of STH eggs in soil. Our results indicate that an intervention designed to increase access to improved latrines and child feces management tools may not be enough to impact environmental occurrence of STH in endemic areas where latrine coverage is already high.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30742614 PMCID: PMC6386409 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0007180
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis ISSN: 1935-2727
Fig 1Study flow diagram.
Endline household characteristics in control, sanitation, and WSH households.
| Control | Sanitation | WSH | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5.7% (44/767) | 4.5% (21/468) | 2.5% (12/476) | |
| 18.9% (145/767) | 19.8% (93/468) | 19.0% (91/478) | |
| 94.4% (846/896) | 94.1% (577/613) | 94.3% (561/595) | |
| 40.0% (359/898) | 36.7% (225/613) | 37.9% (226/596) | |
| 51.8% (370/714) | 52.6% (252/479) | 48.5% (227/468) |
Prevalence of at least one STH egg detected in the soil sample by intervention arm.
| All (N = 2107) | Control (N = 898) | Sanitation (N = 613) | WSH (N = 596) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17.8% | 18.9% | 17.5% | 16.6% | |
| 13.0% | 13.8% | 12.9% | 11.7% | |
| 6.9% | 7.6% | 6.5% | 6.4% | |
| 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
Geometric mean concentration of all STH eggs and viable STH eggs.
Non-detect samples were replaced by half the detection limit for each sample.
| All (N = 2096) | Control (N = 894) | Sanitation (N = 610) | WSH (N = 592) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.052 | 0.053 | 0.051 | 0.050 | |
| 0.048 | 0.049 | 0.047 | 0.046 | |
| 0.048 | 0.049 | 0.048 | 0.046 | |
| 0.040 | 0.041 | 0.039 | 0.040 |
Effect of sanitation intervention (sanitation and WSH combined vs. control) on presence of STH eggs in soil.
A prevalence ratio < 1 indicates a reduction of STH eggs.
| All Eggs | Viable Eggs | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unadjusted (N = 2006) | Adjusted (N = 1958) | Unadjusted (N = 2006) | Adjusted (N = 1958) | |||||
| Prevalence ratio (95% CI) | p | Prevalence ratio (95% CI) | p | Prevalence ratio (95% CI) | p | Prevalence ratio (95% CI) | p | |
| 0.94 (0.78–1.13) | 0.51 | 0.94 (0.76–1.17) | 0.59 | 0.97 (0.76–1.25) | 0.84 | 0.96 (0.72–1.26) | 0.75 | |
| 0.96 (0.76–1.21) | 0.76 | 0.99 (0.76–1.28) | 0.91 | 1.03 (0.77–1.40) | 0.83 | 1.03 (0.74–1.44) | 0.86 | |
| 0.81 (0.57–1.16) | 0.26 | 0.86 (0.62–1.19) | 0.38 | 0.71 (0.45–1.13) | 0.15 | 0.74 (0.46–1.21) | 0.23 | |
Effect of sanitation intervention (sanitation and WSH combined vs control) on concentration of STH eggs in soil.
A percent egg count difference > 0 indicates an increase of STH eggs in soil and < 0 indicates a decrease of STH eggs in soil.
| All eggs | Viable eggs | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unadjusted (N = 1995) | Adjusted (N = 1947) | Unadjusted (N = 2003) | Adjusted (N = 1955) | |||||
| Percent egg count difference | p | Percent egg count difference | p | Percent egg count difference | p | Percent egg count difference | p | |
| -2.2% (-5.8%, 1.3%) | 0.22 | -0.1.2% (-4.6%, 2.2%) | 0.49 | -1.8% (-5.2%, 1.5%) | 0.29 | -0.5% (-3.8%, 2.8%) | 0.75 | |
| -1.8% (-5.2%, 1.7%) | 0.31 | -0.4% (-3.7%, 3.0%) | 0.83 | -1.1% (-4.3%, 2.2%) | 0.53 | 0.2% (-3.0%, 3.4%) | 0.90 | |
| -1.4% (-3.3%, 0.5%) | 0.16 | -0.5% (-2.0%, 1.1%) | 0.53 | -1.5% (-2.6%, 0.4%) | 0.01 | -0.7% (-1.7%, 0.4%) | 0.22 | |
Multivariable Poisson regression model of factors associated with presence of STH in soil in all households (N = 1899).
Households without latrine access are excluded from the model to allow for inclusion of variables related to latrine characteristics.
| Prevalence Ratio | 95% Confidence Interval | p | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Use of shared latrine in households with access to a latrine | 1.39 | (1.13, 1.72) | <0.01 |
| Presence of roof over sampling site | 1.27 | (1.05, 1.53) | 0.01 |
| Presence of latrine slab in households with an observable latrine | 0.93 | (0.77, 1.13) | 0.49 |
| Drophole fully covered in households with an observable latrine | 0.66 | (0.48, 0.91) | 0.01 |
| Stool present on latrine floor in households with an observable latrine | 1.15 | (0.92, 1.43) | 0.22 |
| Young child (under 3 years) dewormed up to 6 months before sampling | 0.85 | (0.68, 1.05) | 0.13 |
| Latrine at least 2 years old | 0.83 | (0.70, 0.99) | 0.03 |
| Percent soil moisture content | 1.02 | (1.01, 1.02) | <0.01 |
| Number of dogs owned at baseline | 1.11 | (1.05, 1.18) | <0.01 |