Predictors of Enteric Pathogens in the Domestic Environment from Human and Animal Sources in Rural Bangladesh.

Fecal indicator organisms are measured to indicate the presence of fecal pollution, yet the association between indicators and pathogens varies by context. The goal of this study was to empirically evaluate the relationships between indicator Escherichia coli, microbial source tracking markers, select enteric pathogen genes, and potential sources of enteric pathogens in 600 rural Bangladeshi households. We measured indicators and pathogen genes in stored drinking water, soil, and on mother and child hands. Additionally, survey and observational data on sanitation and domestic hygiene practices were collected. Log10 concentrations of indicator E. coli were positively associated with the prevalence of pathogenic E. coli genes in all sample types. Given the current need to rely on indicators to assess fecal contamination in the field, it is significant that in this study context indicator E. coli concentrations, measured by IDEXX Colilert-18, provided quantitative information on the presence of pathogenic E. coli in different sample types. There were no significant associations between the human fecal marker (HumM2) and human-specific pathogens in any environmental sample type. There was an increase in the prevalence of Giardia lamblia genes, any E. coli virulence gene, and the specific E. coli virulence genes stx1/2 with every log10 increase in the concentration of the animal fecal marker (BacCow) on mothers' hands. Thus, domestic animals were important contributors to enteric pathogens in these households

Is detection of enteropathogens and human or animal faecal markers in the environment associated with subsequent child enteric infections and growth: an individual participant data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Quantifying contributions of environmental faecal contamination to child diarrhoea and growth faltering can illuminate causal mechanisms behind modest health benefits in recent water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) trials. We aimed to assess associations between environmental detection of enteropathogens and human or animal microbial source tracking markers (MSTM) and subsequent child health outcomes. METHODS: In this individual participant data meta-analysis we searched we searched PubMed, Embase, CAB Direct Global Health, Agricultural and Environmental Science Database, Web of Science, and Scopus for WASH intervention studies with a prospective design and concurrent control that measured enteropathogens or MSTM in environmental samples, or both, and subsequently measured enteric infections, diarrhoea, or height-for-age Z-scores (HAZ) in children younger than 5 years. We excluded studies that only measured faecal indicator bacteria. The initial search was done on Jan 19, 2021, and updated on March 22, 2023. One reviewer (AM) screened abstracts, and two independent reviewers (AM and RT) examined the full texts of short-listed articles. All included studies include at least one author that also contributed as an author to the present Article. Our primary outcomes were the 7-day prevalence of caregiver-reported diarrhoea and HAZ in children. For specific enteropathogens in the environment, primary outcomes also included subsequent child infection with the same pathogen ascertained by stool testing. We estimated associations using covariate-adjusted regressions and pooled estimates across studies. FINDINGS: Data from nine published reports from five interventions studies, which included 8603 children (4302 girls and 4301 boys), were included in the meta-analysis. Environmental pathogen detection was associated with increased infection prevalence with the same pathogen and lower HAZ (ΔHAZ -0·09 [95% CI -0·17 to -0·01]) but not diarrhoea (prevalence ratio 1·22 [95% CI 0·95 to 1·58]), except during wet seasons. Detection of MSTM was not associated with diarrhoea (no pooled estimate) or HAZ (ΔHAZ -0·01 [-0·13 to 0·11] for human markers and ΔHAZ -0·02 [-0·24 to 0·21] for animal markers). Soil, children's hands, and stored drinking water were major transmission pathways. INTERPRETATION: Our findings support a causal chain from pathogens in the environment to infection to growth faltering, indicating that the lack of WASH intervention effects on child growth might stem from insufficient reductions in environmental pathogen prevalence. Studies measuring enteropathogens in the environment should subsequently measure the same pathogens in stool to further examine theories of change between WASH, faecal contamination, and health. Given that environmental pathogen detection was predictive of infection, programmes targeting specific pathogens (eg, vaccinations and elimination efforts) can environmentally monitor the pathogens of interest for population-level surveillance instead of collecting individual biospecimens. FUNDING: The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Development Office

Effect of Sanitation Improvements on Pathogens and Microbial Source Tracking Markers in the Rural Bangladeshi Household Environment.

Diarrheal illnesses from enteric pathogens are a leading cause of death in children under five in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Sanitation is one way to reduce the spread of enteric pathogens in the environment; however, few studies have investigated the effectiveness of sanitation in rural LMICs in reducing pathogens in the environment. In this study, we measured the impact of a sanitation intervention (dual-pit latrines, sani-scoops, child potties delivered as part of a randomized control trial, WASH Benefits) in rural Bangladeshi household compounds by assessing prevalence ratios, differences, and changes in the concentration of pathogen genes and host-specific fecal markers. We found no difference in the prevalence of pathogenic Escherichia coli, norovirus, or Giardia genes in the domestic environment in the sanitation and control arms. The prevalence of the human fecal marker was lower on child hands and the concentration of animal fecal marker was lower on mother hands in the sanitation arm in adjusted models, but these associations were not significant after correcting for multiple comparisons. In the subset of households with ≥10 individuals per compound, the prevalence of enterotoxigenic E. coli genes on child hands was lower in the sanitation arm. Incomplete removal of child and animal feces or the compound (versus community-wide) scale of intervention could explain the limited impacts of improved sanitation

Correction to Predictors of Enteric Pathogens in the Domestic Environment from Human and Animal Sources in Rural Bangladesh.

The authors identified an entry error in Table 1 of this manuscript.1 The number of samples below the limit of detection and limit of quantification for BacCow were switched for mother and child hands. This has been updated in the corrected Table 1 below. The results, conclusions, and discussion are not affected by this correction

Effects of water, sanitation, and hygiene interventions on detection of enteropathogens and host-specific faecal markers in the environment: a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis.

BackgroundWater, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) improvements are promoted to reduce diarrhoea in low-income countries. However, trials from the past 5 years have found mixed effects of household-level and community-level WASH interventions on child health. Measuring pathogens and host-specific faecal markers in the environment can help investigate causal pathways between WASH and health by quantifying whether and by how much interventions reduce environmental exposure to enteric pathogens and faecal contamination from human and different animal sources. We aimed to assess the effects of WASH interventions on enteropathogens and microbial source tracking (MST) markers in environmental samples.MethodsWe did a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis, which included searches from Jan 1, 2000, to Jan 5, 2023, from PubMed, Embase, CAB Direct Global Health, Agricultural and Environmental Science Database, Web of Science, and Scopus, of prospective studies with water, sanitation, or hygiene interventions and concurrent control group that measured pathogens or MST markers in environmental samples and measured child anthropometry, diarrhoea, or pathogen-specific infections. We used covariate-adjusted regression models with robust standard errors to estimate study-specific intervention effects and pooled effect estimates across studies using random-effects models.FindingsFew trials have measured the effect of sanitation interventions on pathogens and MST markers in the environment and they mostly focused on onsite sanitation. We extracted individual participant data on nine environmental assessments from five eligible trials. Environmental sampling included drinking water, hand rinses, soil, and flies. Interventions were consistently associated with reduced pathogen detection in the environment but effect estimates in most individual studies could not be distinguished from chance. Pooled across studies, we found a small reduction in the prevalence of any pathogen in any sample type (pooled prevalence ratio [PR] 0·94 [95% CI 0·90-0·99]). Interventions had no effect on the prevalence of MST markers from humans (pooled PR 1·00 [95% CI 0·88-1·13]) or animals (pooled PR 1·00 [95% CI 0·97-1·03]).InterpretationThe small effect of these sanitation interventions on pathogen detection and absence of effects on human or animal faecal markers are consistent with the small or null health effects previously reported in these trials. Our findings suggest that the basic sanitation interventions implemented in these studies did not contain human waste and did not adequately reduce exposure to enteropathogens in the environment.FundingBill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Development Office

Effects of water, sanitation, and hygiene interventions on detection of enteropathogens and host-specific faecal markers in the environment: a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) improvements are promoted to reduce diarrhoea in low-income countries. However, trials from the past 5 years have found mixed effects of household-level and community-level WASH interventions on child health. Measuring pathogens and host-specific faecal markers in the environment can help investigate causal pathways between WASH and health by quantifying whether and by how much interventions reduce environmental exposure to enteric pathogens and faecal contamination from human and different animal sources. We aimed to assess the effects of WASH interventions on enteropathogens and microbial source tracking (MST) markers in environmental samples. METHODS: We did a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis, which included searches from Jan 1, 2000, to Jan 5, 2023, from PubMed, Embase, CAB Direct Global Health, Agricultural and Environmental Science Database, Web of Science, and Scopus, of prospective studies with water, sanitation, or hygiene interventions and concurrent control group that measured pathogens or MST markers in environmental samples and measured child anthropometry, diarrhoea, or pathogen-specific infections. We used covariate-adjusted regression models with robust standard errors to estimate study-specific intervention effects and pooled effect estimates across studies using random-effects models. FINDINGS: Few trials have measured the effect of sanitation interventions on pathogens and MST markers in the environment and they mostly focused on onsite sanitation. We extracted individual participant data on nine environmental assessments from five eligible trials. Environmental sampling included drinking water, hand rinses, soil, and flies. Interventions were consistently associated with reduced pathogen detection in the environment but effect estimates in most individual studies could not be distinguished from chance. Pooled across studies, we found a small reduction in the prevalence of any pathogen in any sample type (pooled prevalence ratio [PR] 0·94 [95% CI 0·90-0·99]). Interventions had no effect on the prevalence of MST markers from humans (pooled PR 1·00 [95% CI 0·88-1·13]) or animals (pooled PR 1·00 [95% CI 0·97-1·03]). INTERPRETATION: The small effect of these sanitation interventions on pathogen detection and absence of effects on human or animal faecal markers are consistent with the small or null health effects previously reported in these trials. Our findings suggest that the basic sanitation interventions implemented in these studies did not contain human waste and did not adequately reduce exposure to enteropathogens in the environment. FUNDING: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Development Office