19
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Association between Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene Exposures and Cholera in Case–Control Studies

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract.

          Case–control studies are conducted to identify cholera transmission routes. Water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) exposures can facilitate cholera transmission (risk factors) or interrupt transmission (protective factors). To our knowledge, the association between WASH exposures and cholera from case–control studies has not been systematically analyzed. A systematic review was completed to close this gap, including describing the theory of risk and protection, developing inclusion criteria, searching and selecting studies, assessing quality of evidence, and summarizing associations between cholera and seven predicted WASH protective factors and eight predicted WASH risk factors using meta-analysis and sensitivity analysis. Overall, 47 articles describing 51 individual studies from 30 countries met the inclusion criteria. All eight predicted risk factors were associated with higher odds of cholera (odds ratio [OR] = 1.9–5.6), with heterogeneity ( I 2) of 0–92%. Of the predicted protective factors, five of seven were associated with lower odds of cholera (OR = 0.35–1.4), with heterogeneity of 57–91%; exceptions were insignificant associations for improved water source (OR = 1.1, heterogeneity 91%) and improved sanitation (OR = 1.4, heterogeneity 68%). Results were robust; 3/70 (5%) associations changed directionality or significance in sensitivity analysis. Meta-analysis results highlight that predicted risk factors are associated with cholera; however, predicted protective factors are not as consistently protective. This variable protection is attributed to 1) cholera transmission via multiple routes and 2) WASH intervention implementation quality variation. Water, sanitation, and hygiene interventions should address multiple transmission routes and be well implemented, according to international guidance, to ensure that field effectiveness matches theoretical efficacy. In addition, future case–control studies should detail WASH characteristics to contextualize results.

          Related collections

          Most cited references66

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Water, sanitation and hygiene for the prevention of diarrhoea

          Background Ever since John Snow’s intervention on the Broad St pump, the effect of water quality, hygiene and sanitation in preventing diarrhoea deaths has always been debated. The evidence identified in previous reviews is of variable quality, and mostly relates to morbidity rather than mortality. Methods We drew on three systematic reviews, two of them for the Cochrane Collaboration, focussed on the effect of handwashing with soap on diarrhoea, of water quality improvement and of excreta disposal, respectively. The estimated effect on diarrhoea mortality was determined by applying the rules adopted for this supplement, where appropriate. Results The striking effect of handwashing with soap is consistent across various study designs and pathogens, though it depends on access to water. The effect of water treatment appears similarly large, but is not found in few blinded studies, suggesting that it may be partly due to the placebo effect. There is very little rigorous evidence for the health benefit of sanitation; four intervention studies were eventually identified, though they were all quasi-randomized, had morbidity as the outcome, and were in Chinese. Conclusion We propose diarrhoea risk reductions of 48, 17 and 36%, associated respectively, with handwashing with soap, improved water quality and excreta disposal as the estimates of effect for the LiST model. Most of the evidence is of poor quality. More trials are needed, but the evidence is nonetheless strong enough to support the provision of water supply, sanitation and hygiene for all.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The global burden of cholera.

            To estimate the global burden of cholera using population-based incidence data and reports. Countries with a recent history of cholera were classified as endemic or non-endemic, depending on whether they had reported cholera cases in at least three of the five most recent years. The percentages of the population in each country that lacked access to improved sanitation were used to compute the populations at risk for cholera, and incidence rates from published studies were applied to groups of countries to estimate the annual number of cholera cases in endemic countries. The estimates of cholera cases in non-endemic countries were based on the average numbers of cases reported from 2000 to 2008. Literature-based estimates of cholera case-fatality rates (CFRs) were used to compute the variance-weighted average cholera CFRs for estimating the number of cholera deaths. About 1.4 billion people are at risk for cholera in endemic countries. An estimated 2.8 million cholera cases occur annually in such countries (uncertainty range: 1.4-4.3) and an estimated 87,000 cholera cases occur in non-endemic countries. The incidence is estimated to be greatest in children less than 5 years of age. Every year about 91,000 people (uncertainty range: 28,000 to 142,000) die of cholera in endemic countries and 2500 people die of the disease in non-endemic countries. The global burden of cholera, as determined through a systematic review with clearly stated assumptions, is high. The findings of this study provide a contemporary basis for planning public health interventions to control cholera.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Interventions to improve water quality for preventing diarrhoea: systematic review and meta-analysis.

              To assess the effectiveness of interventions to improve the microbial quality of drinking water for preventing diarrhoea. Systematic review. Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group's trials register, CENTRAL, Medline, Embase, LILACS; hand searching; and correspondence with experts and relevant organisations. Randomised and quasirandomised controlled trials of interventions to improve the microbial quality of drinking water for preventing diarrhoea in adults and in children in settings with endemic disease. Allocation concealment, blinding, losses to follow-up, type of intervention, outcome measures, and measures of effect. Pooled effect estimates were calculated within the appropriate subgroups. 33 reports from 21 countries documenting 42 comparisons were included. Variations in design, setting, and type and point of intervention, and variations in defining, assessing, calculating, and reporting outcomes limited the comparability of study results and pooling of results by meta-analysis. In general, interventions to improve the microbial quality of drinking water are effective in preventing diarrhoea. Effectiveness was not conditioned on the presence of improved water supplies or sanitation in the study setting and was not enhanced by combining the intervention with instructions on basic hygiene, a water storage vessel, or improved sanitation or water supplies--other common environmental interventions intended to prevent diarrhoea. Interventions to improve water quality are generally effective for preventing diarrhoea in all ages and in under 5s. Significant heterogeneity among the trials suggests that the level of effectiveness may depend on a variety of conditions that research to date cannot fully explain.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Am J Trop Med Hyg
                Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg
                tpmd
                tropmed
                The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
                The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
                0002-9637
                1476-1645
                August 2018
                02 July 2018
                02 July 2018
                : 99
                : 2
                : 534-545
                Affiliations
                [1]Tufts University Civil and Environmental Engineering Department, Medford, Massachusetts
                Author notes
                [* ]Address correspondence to Marlene Wolfe, Tufts University, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, 200 College Ave., Medford, MA 02155. E-mail: marlene.wolfe@ 123456tufts.edu

                Financial support: M. W. was supported by NSF grant 0966093. T. Y. was supported by both the International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie) and Humanitarian Evidence Programme grants to complete systematic reviews on WASH in emergencies.

                Authors’ addresses: Marlene Wolfe, Mehar Kaur, Travis Yates, Mark Woodin, and Daniele Lantagne, Tufts University Civil and Environmental Engineering Department, Medford, MA, E-mails: marlene.wolfe@ 123456tufts.edu , meharkaur2@ 123456gmail.com , travis@ 123456yatesinternational.com , mark.woodin@ 123456tufts.edu , and daniele.lantagne@ 123456tufts.edu .

                [†]

                These authors contributed equally to the work.

                Article
                tpmd170897
                10.4269/ajtmh.17-0897
                6090371
                29968551
                5d5e49b0-4245-47b8-8859-c06e6fc325ab
                © The American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 17 November 2017
                : 15 May 2018
                Page count
                Pages: 12
                Categories
                Articles

                Infectious disease & Microbiology
                Infectious disease & Microbiology

                Comments

                Comment on this article