Literature DB >> 32559486

Improve private well testing outreach efficiency by targeting households based on proximity to a high arsenic well.

Sara V Flanagan1, Nicholas A Procopio2, Steven E Spayd2, Jessie A Gleason3, Yan Zheng4.   

Abstract

Research into precautionary action suggests outreach with personally-relevant risk information may help overcome optimistic biases, which have been shown to impede voluntary testing for arsenic by at-risk private well households. Since 2002, New Jersey's Private Well Testing Act (PWTA) has required testing for arsenic during real estate transactions. The PWTA database of over 35,000 geocoded well arsenic tests offers a unique opportunity to evaluate the efficacy of targeted outreach to neighbors living in proximity to a known high arsenic well with variable risk messaging to motivate testing. In this study, residents of properties (n = 1743) located within 500 ft and between 500 and 1000 ft of a known high arsenic well (>5 μg/L, New Jersey's drinking water arsenic standard) were mailed a notice of the high arsenic result in their neighborhood and offered a free water test. Overall 274 households (16%) requested a test kit and 230 (13%) ultimately submitted a water sample; with significantly higher participation rates among those told their neighborhood well had an arsenic concentration "over 5 times higher" than the standard, compared to those told the concentration was "above." Overall, 25% of wells tested (n = 230), and 47% (n = 66) of non-treated wells located within 500 ft of a well with >25 μg/L arsenic, exceeded the standard for arsenic. Both the arsenic concentration and distance to the neighboring well were significant predictors of exceedance. Given the high proportion of previously untested wells (70%) and their owners' lack of awareness of arsenic in their area (80%), this targeting approach succeeded not only in identifying a much higher proportion of at risk wells than blanket testing by town or county, but also in motivating testing among households unreached by prior awareness-raising activities. In conclusion, geographically and personally-relevant risk targeted messaging and outreach are both efficient and effective.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Arsenic; Drinking water testing; Outreach; Private well; Public health; Spatial heterogeneity

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32559486      PMCID: PMC7429275          DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.139689

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Total Environ        ISSN: 0048-9697            Impact factor:   7.963


  25 in total

1.  Rapid multi-element analysis of groundwater by high-resolution inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry.

Authors:  Z Cheng; Y Zheng; R Mortlock; A Van Geen
Journal:  Anal Bioanal Chem       Date:  2004-04-20       Impact factor: 4.142

2.  Health protective behavior following required arsenic testing under the New Jersey Private Well Testing Act.

Authors:  Sara V Flanagan; Jessie A Gleason; Steven E Spayd; Nicholas A Procopio; Megan Rockafellow-Baldoni; Stuart Braman; Steven N Chillrud; Yan Zheng
Journal:  Int J Hyg Environ Health       Date:  2018-06-06       Impact factor: 5.840

3.  Treating and drinking well water in the presence of health risks from arsenic contamination: results from a U.S. hot spot.

Authors:  W Douglass Shaw; Mark Walker; Marnee Benson
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 4.000

4.  Acute myocardial infarction mortality in comparison with lung and bladder cancer mortality in arsenic-exposed region II of Chile from 1950 to 2000.

Authors:  Yan Yuan; Guillermo Marshall; Catterina Ferreccio; Craig Steinmaus; Steve Selvin; Jane Liaw; Michael N Bates; Allan H Smith
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2007-09-17       Impact factor: 4.897

5.  The effect of graphics on environmental health risk beliefs, emotions, behavioral intentions, and recall.

Authors:  Dolores J Severtson; Jeffrey B Henriques
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 4.000

6.  A Community-Driven Intervention in Tuftonboro, New Hampshire, Succeeds in Altering Water Testing Behavior.

Authors:  Michael P Paul; Pierce Rigrod; Steve Wingate; Mark E Borsuk
Journal:  J Environ Health       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 1.179

Review 7.  Health effects of arsenic and chromium in drinking water: recent human findings.

Authors:  Allan H Smith; Craig M Steinmaus
Journal:  Annu Rev Public Health       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 21.981

8.  Arsenic in private well water part 1 of 3: Impact of the New Jersey Private Well Testing Act on household testing and mitigation behavior.

Authors:  Sara V Flanagan; Steven E Spayd; Nicholas A Procopio; Steven N Chillrud; Stuart Braman; Yan Zheng
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2016-04-23       Impact factor: 7.963

9.  A cross-sectional study of well water arsenic and child IQ in Maine schoolchildren.

Authors:  Gail A Wasserman; Xinhua Liu; Nancy J Loiacono; Jennie Kline; Pam Factor-Litvak; Alexander van Geen; Jacob L Mey; Diane Levy; Richard Abramson; Amy Schwartz; Joseph H Graziano
Journal:  Environ Health       Date:  2014-04-01       Impact factor: 5.984

10.  The Case for Universal Screening of Private Well Water Quality in the U.S. and Testing Requirements to Achieve It: Evidence from Arsenic.

Authors:  Yan Zheng; Sara V Flanagan
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2017-08-03       Impact factor: 9.031

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.