Quantitative assessment of fecal contamination in multiple environmental sample types in urban communities in Dhaka, Bangladesh using SaniPath microbial approach.

Rapid urbanization has led to a growing sanitation crisis in urban areas of Bangladesh and potential exposure to fecal contamination in the urban environment due to inadequate sanitation and poor fecal sludge management. Limited data are available on environmental fecal contamination associated with different exposure pathways in urban Dhaka. We conducted a cross-sectional study to explore the magnitude of fecal contamination in the environment in low-income, high-income, and transient/floating neighborhoods in urban Dhaka. Ten samples were collected from each of 10 environmental compartments in 10 different neighborhoods (4 low-income, 4 high-income and 2 transient/floating neighborhoods). These 1,000 samples were analyzed with the IDEXX-Quanti-Tray technique to determine most-probable-number (MPN) of E. coli. Samples of open drains (6.91 log10 MPN/100 mL), surface water (5.28 log10 MPN/100 mL), floodwater (4.60 log10 MPN/100 mL), produce (3.19 log10 MPN/serving), soil (2.29 log10 MPN/gram), and street food (1.79 log10 MPN/gram) had the highest mean log10 E. coli contamination compared to other samples. The contamination concentrations did not differ between low-income and high-income neighborhoods for shared latrine swabs, open drains, municipal water, produce, and street foodsamples. E. coli contamination levels were significantly higher (p <0.05) in low-income neighborhoods compared to high-income for soil (0.91 log10 MPN/gram, 95% CI, 0.39, 1.43), bathing water (0.98 log10 MPN/100 mL, 95% CI, 0.41, 1.54), non-municipal water (0.64 log10 MPN/100 mL, 95% CI, 0.24, 1.04), surface water (1.92 log10 MPN/100 mL, 95% CI, 1.44, 2.40), and floodwater (0.48 log10 MPN/100 mL, 95% CI, 0.03, 0.92) samples. E. coli contamination were significantly higher (p<0.05) in low-income neighborhoods compared to transient/floating neighborhoods for drain water, bathing water, non-municipal water and surface water. Future studies should examine behavior that brings people into contact with the environment and assess the extent of exposure to fecal contamination in the environment through multiple pathways and associated risks.

Effects of Water, Sanitation, Handwashing, and Nutritional Interventions on Child Enteric Protozoan Infections in Rural Bangladesh: A Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial.

Background: We evaluated effects of individual and combined water, sanitation, handwashing (WSH), and nutritional interventions on protozoan infections in children. Methods: We randomized geographical clusters of pregnant women in rural Bangladesh into chlorinated drinking water, hygienic sanitation, handwashing, nutrition, combined WSH, nutrition plus WSH (N+WSH), or control arms. Participants were not masked. After approximately 2.5 years of intervention, we measured Giardia, Cryptosporidium, and Entamoeba histolytica prevalence and infection intensity by multiplex real-time polymerase chain reaction of child stool. Analysis was intention-to-treat. Results: Between May 2012 and July 2013, we randomized 5551 pregnant women. At follow-up, among 4102 available women, we enrolled 6694 children into the protozoan assessment. We analyzed stool from 5933 children (aged ~31 months) for protozoan infections. Compared with 35.5% prevalence among controls, Giardia infection prevalence was lower in the sanitation (26.5%; prevalence ratio [PR], 0.75 [95% confidence interval {CI}, .64-.88]), handwashing (28.2%; PR, 0.80 [95% CI, .66-.96]), WSH (29.7%; PR, 0.83 [95% CI, .72-.96]), and N+WSH (26.7%; PR, 0.75 [95% CI, .64-.88]) arms. Water and nutrition interventions had no effect. Low prevalence of E. histolytica and Cryptosporidium (<2%) resulted in imprecise effect estimates. Conclusions: Individual handwashing and hygienic sanitation interventions significantly reduced childhood Giardia infections, and there were no effects of chlorinated drinking water and nutrition improvements in this context. Combined WSH interventions provided no additional benefit. To reduce Giardia infection, individual WSH interventions may be more feasible and cost-effective than combined interventions in similar rural, low-income settings. Clinical Trials Registration: NCT01590095.