| Literature DB >> 32632178 |
Jochen G Raimann1,2,3,4, Joseph Marfo Boaheng5,6, Philipp Narh5,7, Harrison Matti5, Seth Johnson8,5, Linda Donald8,5, Hongbin Zhang9,10, Friedrich Port8,11, Nathan W Levin8,5.
Abstract
In rural regions with limited resources, the provision of clean water remains challenging. The resulting high incidence of diarrhea can lead to acute kidney injury and death, particularly in the young and the old. Membrane filtration using recycled hemodialyzers allows water purification. This study quantifies the public health effects. Between 02/2018 and 12/2018, 4 villages in rural Ghana were provided with a high-volume membrane filtration device (NuFiltration). Household surveys were collected monthly with approval from Ghana Health Services. Incidence rates of diarrhea for 5-month periods before and after implementation of the device were collected and compared to corresponding rates in 4 neighboring villages not yet equipped. Data of 1,130 villagers over 10 months from the studied communities were studied. Incidence rates showed a decline following the implementation of the device from 0.18 to 0.05 cases per person-month (ppm) compared to the control villages (0.11 to 0.08 ppm). The rate ratio of 0.27 for the study villages is revised to 0.38 when considering the non-significant rate reduction in the control villages. Provision of a repurposed hemodialyzer membrane filtration device markedly improves health outcomes as measured by diarrhea incidence within rural communities.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32632178 PMCID: PMC7338386 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-68408-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Hemodialyzer membrane filtration device used for our project. Setting with (a) a manual pump (up to 500 L/h) and (b) gravitational force (up to 250 L/h) for driving the contaminated into the re-sterilized and repurposed hemodialyzer filters.
Demographics of villagers in study and control villages.
| Study villages (4) | Control villages (4) | |
|---|---|---|
| Count [villagers/villages] | 441 | 689 |
| Age | ||
| < 5 years [count (%)] | 50 (11.3) | 56 (8.13) |
| 5 to 18 years [count (%)] | 131 (29.7) | 249 (36.14) |
| 18 to 30 years [count (%)] | 103 (23.4) | 130 (18.87) |
| 30 to 50 years [count (%)] | 97 (22) | 151 (21.92) |
| > 50 years [count (%)] | 50 (11.3) | 103 (14.95) |
| Male gender [count (%)] | 193 (43.76) | 346 (50.22) |
| Sanitation facilities | ||
| Pit latrine | 18 (4.1) | 1 (0.15) |
| Water closet | 0 (0) | 0 (0.00) |
| Public toilet | 0 (0) | 3 (0.44) |
| Open defecation | 423 (95.9) | 685 (99.42) |
Diarrhea incidence counts and rates for the entire 5 months A) before and B) after device implementation in the village.
| Study villages | Control villages | |
|---|---|---|
| A) Before implementation | ||
| Count (villagers) | 357 to 441 | 697 to 816 |
| Incidence count (count) | 153 | 172 |
| Exposure days (days) | 26,208 | 48,272 |
| Incidence rate (count/person-month) | 0.18 | 0.11 |
| B) After implementation | ||
| Count (villagers) | 312 to 359 | 683 to 699 |
| Incidence count (count) | 39 | 130 |
| Exposure days (days) | 23,576 | 48,748 |
| Incidence rate (count/person-month) | 0.05 | 0.08 |
Figure 2Monthly diarrhea incidence rates between February (Month − 5) and November (Month + 5) 2018 in (a) study villages, where the device was installed in late June 2018 and (b) control villages with no device installation during the same months.