Implementing a Community-Led Arsenic Mitigation Intervention for Private Well Users in American Indian Communities: A Qualitative Evaluation of the Strong Heart Water Study Program

Arsenic is a naturally occurring toxicant in groundwater, which increases cancer and cardiovascular disease risk. American Indian populations are disproportionately exposed to arsenic in drinking water. The Strong Heart Water Study (SHWS), through a community-centered approach for intervention development and implementation, delivered an arsenic mitigation program for private well users in American Indian communities. The SHWS program comprised community-led water arsenic testing, point-of-use arsenic filter installation, and a mobile health program to promote sustained filter use and maintenance (i.e., changing the filter cartridge). Half of enrolled households received additional in-person behavior change communication and videos. Our objectives for this study were to assess successes, barriers, and facilitators in the implementation, use, and maintenance of the program among implementers and recipients. We conducted 45 semi-structured interviews with implementers and SHWS program recipients. We analyzed barriers and facilitators using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and the Risks, Attitudes, Norms, Abilities, and Self-regulation model. At the implementer level, facilitators included building rapport and trust between implementers and participating households. Barriers included the remoteness of households, coordinating with community plumbers for arsenic filter installation, and difficulty securing a local supplier for replacement filter cartridges. At the recipient level, facilitators included knowledge of the arsenic health risks, perceived effectiveness of the filter, and visual cues to promote habit formation. Barriers included attitudes towards water taste and temperature and inability to procure or install replacement filter cartridges. This study offers insights into the successes and challenges of implementing an arsenic mitigation program tailored to American Indian households, which can inform future programs in partnership with these and potentially similar affected communities. Our study suggests that building credibility and trust between implementers and participants is important for the success of arsenic mitigation programs

Behavioral determinants of arsenic-safe water use among Great Plains Indian Nation private well users: results from the Community-Led Strong Heart Water Study Arsenic Mitigation Program

Abstract Background The objective of this study was to evaluate the behavioral determinants associated with exclusive use of arsenic-safe water in the community-led Strong Heart Water Study (SHWS) arsenic mitigation program. Methods The SHWS is a randomized controlled trial of a community-led arsenic mitigation program designed to reduce arsenic exposure among private well users in American Indian Great Plains communities. All households received point-of-use (POU) arsenic filters installed at baseline and were followed for 2 years. Behavioral determinants selected were those targeted during the development of the SHWS program, and were assessed at baseline and follow-up. Results Among participants, exclusive use of arsenic-safe water for drinking and cooking at follow-up was associated with higher self-efficacy for accessing local resources to learn about arsenic (OR: 5.19, 95% CI: 1.48–18.21) and higher self-efficacy to resolve challenges related to arsenic in water using local resources (OR: 3.11, 95% CI: 1.11–8.71). Higher commitment to use the POU arsenic filter faucet at baseline was also a significant predictor of exclusive arsenic-safe water use for drinking (OR: 32.57, 95% CI: 1.42–746.70) and cooking (OR: 15.90, 95% CI: 1.33–189.52) at follow-up. From baseline to follow-up, the SHWS program significantly increased perceived vulnerability to arsenic exposure, self-efficacy, descriptive norms, and injunctive norms. Changing one’s arsenic filter cartridge after installation was associated with higher self-efficacy to obtain arsenic-safe water for drinking (OR: 6.22, 95% CI: 1.33–29.07) and cooking (OR: 10.65, 95% CI: 2.48–45.68) and higher perceived vulnerability of personal health effects (OR: 7.79, 95% CI: 1.17–51.98) from drinking arsenic-unsafe water. Conclusions The community-led SHWS program conducted a theory-driven approach for intervention development and evaluation that allowed for behavioral determinants to be identified that were associated with the use of arsenic safe water and changing one’s arsenic filter cartridge. These results demonstrate that theory-driven, context-specific formative research can influence behavior change interventions to reduce water arsenic exposure. The SHWS can serve as a model for the design of theory-driven intervention approaches that engage communities to reduce arsenic exposure. Trial registration The SHWS is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT03725592)

Tapwater Exposures, Effects Potential, and Residential Risk Management in Northern Plains Nations

In the United States (US), private-supply tapwater (TW) is rarely monitored. This data gap undermines individual/community risk-management decision-making, leading to an increased probability of unrecognized contaminant exposures in rural and remote locations that rely on private wells. We assessed point-of-use (POU) TW in three northern plains Tribal Nations, where ongoing TW arsenic (As) interventions include expansion of small community water systems and POU adsorptive-media treatment for Strong Heart Water Study participants. Samples from 34 private-well and 22 public-supply sites were analyzed for 476 organics, 34 inorganics, and 3 in vitro bioactivities. 63 organics and 30 inorganics were detected. Arsenic, uranium (U), and lead (Pb) were detected in 54%, 43%, and 20% of samples, respectively. Concentrations equivalent to public-supply maximum contaminant level(s) (MCL) were exceeded only in untreated private-well samples (As 47%, U 3%). Precautionary health-based screening levels were exceeded frequently, due to inorganics in private supplies and chlorine-based disinfection byproducts in public supplies. The results indicate that simultaneous exposures to co-occurring TW contaminants are common, warranting consideration of expanded source, point-of-entry, or POU treatment(s). This study illustrates the importance of increased monitoring of private-well TW, employing a broad, environmentally informative analytical scope, to reduce the risks of unrecognized contaminant exposures