Search

Sanitation improvements have had limited effectiveness in reducing the spread of fecal pathogens into the environment. We conducted environmental measurements within a randomized controlled trial in Bangladesh that implemented individual and combined water treatment, sanitation, handwashing (WSH) and nutrition interventions (WASH Benefits, NCT01590095). Following approximately 4 months of intervention, we enrolled households in the trial's control, sanitation and combined WSH arms to assess whether sanitation improvements, alone and coupled with water treatment and handwashing, reduce fecal contamination in the domestic environment. We quantified fecal indicator bacteria in samples of drinking and ambient waters, child hands, food given to young children, courtyard soil and flies. In the WSH arm, Escherichia coli prevalence in stored drinking water was reduced by 62% (prevalence ratio = 0.38 (0.32, 0.44)) and E. coli concentration by 1-log (Δlog10 = -0.88 (-1.01, -0.75)). The interventions did not reduce E. coli along other sampled pathways. Ambient contamination remained high among intervention households. Potential reasons include noncommunity-level sanitation coverage, child open defecation, animal fecal sources, or naturalized E. coli in the environment. Future studies should explore potential threshold effects of different levels of community sanitation coverage on environmental contamination.

Enteric pathogens can be transmitted through multiple environmental pathways, yet little is known about the relative contribution of each pathway to diarrhea risk among children. We aimed to identify fecal transmission pathways in the household environment associated with prospectively measured child diarrhea in rural Bangladesh. We measured the presence and levels of Escherichia coli in tube wells, stored drinking water, pond water, child hand rinses, courtyard soil, flies, and food in 1843 households. Gastrointestinal symptoms among children ages 0-60 months were recorded concurrently at the time of environmental sample collection and again a median of 6 days later. Incident diarrhea (3 or more loose stools in a 24-h period) was positively associated with the concentration of E. coli on child hands measured on the first visit (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.23, 95% CI 1.06, 1.43 for a log10 increase), while other pathways were not associated. In cross-sectional analysis, there were no associations between concurrently measured environmental contamination and diarrhea. Our findings suggest higher levels of E. coli on child hands are strongly associated with subsequent diarrheal illness rates among children in rural Bangladesh.

Fecal-oral pathogens are transmitted through complex, environmentally mediated pathways. Sanitation interventions that isolate human feces from the environment may reduce transmission but have shown limited impact on environmental contamination. We conducted a study in rural Bangladesh to (1) quantify domestic fecal contamination in settings with high on-site sanitation coverage; (2) determine how domestic animals affect fecal contamination; and (3) assess how each environmental pathway affects others. We collected water, hand rinse, food, soil, and fly samples from 608 households. We analyzed samples with IDEXX Quantitray for the most probable number (MPN) of E. coli. We detected E. coli in source water (25%), stored water (77%), child hands (43%), food (58%), flies (50%), ponds (97%), and soil (95%). Soil had >120 000 mean MPN E. coli per gram. In compounds with vs without animals, E. coli was higher by 0.54 log10 in soil, 0.40 log10 in stored water and 0.61 log10 in food (p < 0.05). E. coli in stored water and food increased with increasing E. coli in soil, ponds, source water and hands. We provide empirical evidence of fecal transmission in the domestic environment despite on-site sanitation. Animal feces contribute to fecal contamination, and fecal indicator bacteria do not strictly indicate human fecal contamination when animals are present.