Evaluation of antibacterial soap in the management of lymphoedema in Leogane, Haiti.

In areas endemic for lymphatic filariasis, progression of lymphoedema is associated with recurrent bacterial acute dermatolymphangioadenitis (ADLA). The role of antibacterial soap in preventing ADLA is unknown. In a randomized double-blinded clinical trial in Leogane, Haiti, lymphoedema patients washed affected legs with antibacterial (n = 97) or plain soap (n = 100). Reported ADLA incidence (by recall) before the study was 1.1 episodes per person-year, compared to 0.40 assessed during the 12-month study. ADLA incidence was significantly associated with age, illiteracy and lymphoedema stage, but not with soap type. Washing with soap, regardless of its antibacterial content, can help decrease ADLA incidence. (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier number NCT00139100.).

Determinants of use of household-level water chlorination products in rural Kenya, 2003-2005.

Household-level water treatment products provide safe drinking water to at-risk populations, but relatively few people use them regularly; little is known about factors that influence uptake of this proven health intervention. We assessed uptake of these water treatments in Nyanza Province, Kenya, November 2003-February 2005. We interviewed users and non-user controls of a new household water treatment product regarding drinking water and socioeconomic factors. We calculated regional use-prevalence of these products based on 10 randomly selected villages in the Asembo region of Nyanza Province, Kenya. Thirty-eight percent of respondents reported ever using household-level treatment products. Initial use of a household-level product was associated with having turbid water as a source (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 16.6, p = 0.007), but consistent usage was more common for a less costly and more accessible product that did not address turbidity. A combination of social marketing, retail marketing, and donor subsidies may be necessary to extend the health benefits of household-level water treatment to populations most at risk.

Flocculant-disinfectant point-of-use water treatment for reducing arsenic exposure in rural Bangladesh.

We introduced flocculant-disinfectant water treatment for 12 weeks in 103 households in Bangladesh to assess if drinking water would be chemically and microbiologically improved and the body burden of arsenic reduced. The median concentration of arsenic in tubewell water decreased by 88% after introduction of the flocculant-disinfectant from 136 microg/l at baseline to 16 (p < 0.001). The median concentration of total urinary arsenic decreased 42% from 385 microg/g creatinine at baseline to 225 microg/g creatinine after intervention (p < 0.001). Among 206 post-intervention drinking water samples that were reportedly treated on the date the sample was collected, 99 (48%) lacked residual free chlorine and 100 (49%) were contaminated with thermotolerant coliforms. The flocculant-disinfectant markedly reduced arsenic in drinking water, but treated drinking water was frequently contaminated with fecal organisms. The lesser reduction in urinary arsenic compared to water arsenic and the health consequences of this reduction require further research.

Difficulties in bringing point-of-use water treatment to scale in rural Guatemala.

In an earlier study in rural Guatemala, 257 households that received flocculant-disinfectant to treat their drinking water had 39% less diarrhea than 257 control households. Three weeks after completion of the study, national marketing of the flocculant-disinfectant was extended into the study communities. Six months later, we assessed frequency of and characteristics associated with purchase and use of the flocculant-disinfectant by revisiting the original study households and administering a questionnaire. Four hundred sixty-two households (90%) completed the follow-up survey; 22 households (5%) purchased the flocculant-disinfectant within the preceding 2 weeks and used it within the last week. Neither being randomized to the intervention group during the efficacy study nor combined spending on laundry soap, toothpaste, and hand soap in the preceding week was associated with active repeat use. Even after efficacy was demonstrated within their community and an aggressive sophisticated marketing approach, few households purchased flocculant-disinfectant for point-of-use water treatment.

Drinking water microbiological survey of the Northwestern State of Sinaloa, Mexico.

A potable water survey, in two important municipalities of the state of Sinaloa, Mexico was conducted. Culiacan, capital city of Sinaloa and its neighboring municipality, Navolato were selected to enumerate Aeromonas hydrophila, Escherichia coli, fecal and total coliforms, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Heterotrophic plate count bacteria from 100 households' taps. Manganese; residual chlorine; pH; temperature and turbidity were also examined. Overall, Aeromonas hydrophila was not detected in any of the samples, 3% contained Escherichia coli, 28% had fecal and 46 total coliforms, P. aeruginosa was present in 15% of the samples. HPC bacteria were found in all of the samples but 43% had numbers greater than 500 CFU per ml. The average numbers obtained for the physico-chemical parameters were 0.15 mg/L; 0.32 mg/L; 6.5; 28.7 degrees C and 2.92 NTU for manganese, residual chlorine, pH, temperature and turbidity, respectively. The findings of the current study demonstrate that potable water from both municipalities can harbor substantial numbers of indicator and opportunistic pathogens suggesting that additional treatment in the household may be needed.

Combining drinking water treatment and hand washing for diarrhoea prevention, a cluster randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of point of use water treatment with flocculent-disinfectant on reducing diarrhoea and the additional benefit of promoting hand washing with soap. METHODS: The study was conducted in squatter settlements of Karachi, Pakistan, where diarrhoea is a leading cause of childhood death. Interventions were randomly assigned to 47 neighbourhoods. Households in 10 neighbourhoods received diluted bleach and a water vessel; nine neighbourhoods received soap and were encouraged to wash hands; nine neighbourhoods received flocculent-disinfectant water treatment and a water vessel; 10 neighbourhoods received disinfectant-disinfectant water treatment and soap and were encouraged to wash hands; and nine neighbourhoods were followed as controls. Field workers visited households at least once a week from April to December 2003 to promote use of the interventions and to collect data on diarrhoea. RESULTS: Study participants in control neighbourhoods had diarrhoea on 5.2% of days. Compared to controls, participants living in intervention neighbourhoods had a lower prevalence of diarrhoea: 55% (95% CI 17%, 80%) lower in bleach and water vessel neighbourhoods, 51% (95% CI 12%, 76%) lower in hand washing promotion with soap neighbourhoods, 64% lower (95% CI 29%, 90%) in disinfectant-disinfectant neighbourhoods, and 55% (95% CI 18%, 80%) lower in disinfectant-disinfectant plus hand washing with soap neighbourhoods. CONCLUSIONS: With an intense community-based intervention and supplies provided free of cost, each of the home-based interventions significantly reduced diarrhoea. There was no benefit by combining hand washing promotion with water treatment.

Reducing diarrhoea in Guatemalan children: randomized controlled trial of flocculant-disinfectant for drinking-water.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of a new point-of-use treatment for drinking-water, a commercially developed flocculant-disinfectant, on the prevalence of diarrhoea in children. METHODS: We conducted a randomized controlled trial among 514 rural Guatemalan households, divided into 42 neighbourhood clusters, for 13 weeks, from 4 November 2002 through 31 January 2003. Clusters assigned to water treatment with the flocculant-disinfectant were compared with those using their usual water-handling practices. The longitudinal prevalence of diarrhoea was calculated as the proportion of total days with diarrhoea divided by the total number of days of observation. The prevalence of diarrhoea was compared using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. FINDINGS: The 1702 people in households receiving the disinfectant had a prevalence of diarrhoea that was 40% lower than that among the 1699 people using standard water-handling practices (0.9% versus 1.5%; P = 0.001). In households using the flocculant-disinfectant, children < 1 year of age had a 39% lower prevalence of diarrhoea than those in households using their standard practices (3.7% versus 6.0%; P = 0.005). CONCLUSION: In settings where families rarely treat drinking-water, we introduced a novel flocculant-disinfectant that reduced the longitudinal prevalence of diarrhoea, especially among children aged < 1 year, among whom diarrhoea has been strongly associated with mortality. Successful introduction and use of this product could contribute to preventing diarrhoeal disease globally.

Household based treatment of drinking water with flocculant-disinfectant for preventing diarrhoea in areas with turbid source water in rural western Kenya: cluster randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect on prevalence of diarrhoea and mortality of household based treatment of drinking water with flocculant-disinfectant, sodium hypochlorite, and standard practices in areas with turbid water source in Africa. DESIGN: Cluster randomised controlled trial over 20 weeks. SETTING: Family compounds, each containing several houses, in rural western Kenya. PARTICIPANTS: 6650 people in 605 family compounds. INTERVENTION: Water treatment: flocculant-disinfectant, sodium hypochlorite, and usual practice (control). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prevalence of diarrhoea and all cause mortality. Escherichia coli concentration, free residual chlorine concentration, and turbidity in household drinking water as surrogates for effectiveness of water treatment. RESULTS: In children < 2 years old, compared with those in the control compounds, the absolute difference in prevalence of diarrhoea was -25% in the flocculant-disinfectant arm (95% confidence interval -40 to -5) and -17% in the sodium hypochlorite arm (-34 to 4). In all age groups compared with control, the absolute difference in prevalence was -19% in the flocculant-disinfectant arm (-34 to -2) and -26% in the sodium hypochlorite arm (-39 to -9). There were significantly fewer deaths in the intervention compounds than in the control compounds (relative risk of death 0.58, P = 0.036). Fourteen per cent of water samples from control compounds had E coli concentrations < 1 CFU/100 ml compared with 82% in flocculant-disinfectant and 78% in sodium hypochlorite compounds. The mean turbidity of drinking water was 8 nephelometric turbidity units (NTU) in flocculant-disinfectant households, compared with 55 NTU in the two other compounds (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In areas of turbid water, flocculant-disinfectant was associated with a significant reduction in diarrhoea among children < 2 years. This health benefit, combined with a significant reduction in turbidity, suggests that the flocculant-disinfectant is well suited to areas with highly contaminated and turbid water.

Delayed effectiveness of home-based interventions in reducing childhood diarrhea, Karachi, Pakistan.

We introduced home drinking water disinfection and handwashing with soap in Karachi squatter settlements to evaluate their effect on diarrhea. In April 2000, 150 households received soap, 76 received dilute bleach and a water storage vessel, and 76 were enrolled as controls. In 2000, among households wealthy enough to own a refrigerator, children in households that received bleach and a vessel had a 73% lower incidence of diarrhea than controls; those that received soap had a 56% lower incidence. There was no reduction in diarrhea in intervention households without a refrigerator. In 2001, households that received bleach and a vessel had a 71% lower incidence of diarrhea and children in households that received soap had a 35% lower incidence than controls. In 2001, the interventions were equally effective in households that had a refrigerator and those that did not. Both of these home-based interventions were ultimately effective in preventing diarrhea, but only households of slightly higher socioeconomic status changed their behavior quickly enough to benefit during the first summer.

Efficacy of organic acids in hand cleansers for prevention of rhinovirus infections.

Direct hand-to-hand contact is an important mechanism of transmission of rhinovirus infection. The rhinoviruses are inactivated at a low pH. A survey of organic acids in vitro revealed that these compounds have antirhinoviral activity that persists for at least 3 h after application to the skin. In additional studies of salicylic acid (SA) and pyroglutamic acid (PGA), the hands of volunteers were contaminated with rhinovirus at defined times after application of the acid, and then volunteers attempted to inoculate the nasal mucosa with one hand and quantitative viral cultures were done on the other hand. In one study, 3.5% SA or 1% SA with 3.5% PGA was compared with controls 15 min after application to assess the efficacy of the inactivation of virus and prevention of infection. Virus was recovered from the hands of 28 out of 31 (90%) of the volunteers in the control group compared to 4 out of 27 (15%) and 0 out of 27 in the groups administered 3.5 and 1% SA, respectively (P < 0.05). Rhinovirus infection occurred in 10 out of 31 (32%) of the controls and 2 out of 27 (7%) of volunteers in both treatment groups (P < 0.05 compared with control). In a second study, the efficacy of 4% PGA was evaluated 15 min, 1 h, and 3 h after application. Significantly fewer volunteers had positive hand cultures at all time points compared with the control group, but the proportion that developed rhinovirus infection was not significantly reduced. These results suggest the feasibility of the prevention of rhinovirus transmission by hand treatments that are virucidal on contact and have activity that persists after application.

A randomized controlled trial of household-based flocculant-disinfectant drinking water treatment for diarrhea prevention in rural Guatemala.

We conducted a study to determine if use of a new flocculant-disinfectant home water treatment reduced diarrhea. We randomly assigned 492 rural Guatemalan households to five different water treatment groups: flocculant-disinfectant, flocculant-disinfectant plus a customized vessel, bleach, bleach plus a vessel, and control. During one year of observation, residents of control households had 4.31 episodes of diarrhea per 100 person-weeks, whereas the incidence of diarrhea was 24% lower among residents of households receiving flocculant-disinfectant, 29% lower among those receiving flocculant-disinfectant plus vessel, 25% lower among those receiving bleach, and 12% lower among households receiving bleach plus vessel. In unannounced evaluations of home drinking water, free chlorine was detected in samples from 27% of flocculant-disinfectant households, 35% of flocculant-disinfectant plus vessel households, 35% of bleach households, and 43% of bleach plus vessel households. In a setting where diarrhea was a leading cause of death, intermittent use of home water treatment with flocculant-disinfectant decreased the incidence of diarrhea.

Microbial flora of hands of homemakers.

OBJECTIVES AND METHODS: Because of increasing concern about antimicrobial resistance in the community, aerobic flora of hands of 224 healthy homemakers in northern Manhattan, New York, were examined. RESULTS: Mean log colony-forming unit counts before and after handwashing were 5.72 and 5.69, respectively, P =.60; mean number of species identified/sample was 3.6 before washing and 3.3 after (P =.02). After handwashing gram-negative bacteria were isolated from 75.1% of subjects; yeast from 32.9%; and Staphylococcus aureus from 18.5%, 1 of which (2.4%) was oxacillin-resistant. Generally, these community isolates were more sensitive than isolates from inpatients in the local hospital, although community isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa were significantly more resistant than inpatient isolates for 4/10 agents tested. CONCLUSIONS: Hands of healthy persons in the community were usually colonized with gram-negative bacteria, a single handwash had little impact on microbial counts, and hands of healthy adults may increasingly become one reservoir for antimicrobial resistance.

Evaluation of a new water treatment for point-of-use household applications to remove microorganisms and arsenic from drinking water.

Contamination of drinking water by microorganisms and arsenic represents a major human health hazard in many parts of the world. An estimated 3.4 million deaths a year are attributable to waterborne diseases. Arsenic poisoning from contaminated water sources is causing a major health emergency in some countries such as Bangladesh where 35 to 77 million people are at risk. The World Health Organization (WHO) has recently recognized point-of-use water treatment as an effective means of reducing illness in developing country households. A new point-of-use water treatment system that is based on flocculation, sedimentation and disinfection was evaluated for the removal of bacterial, viral and parasitic pathogens as well as arsenic from drinking water to estimate its potential for use in developing countries. Tests were conducted with United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)-model and field- sample waters from developing countries. Samples were seeded with known numbers of organisms, treated with the combined flocculation/disinfection product, and assayed for survivors using standard assay techniques appropriate for the organism. Results indicated that this treatment system reduced the levels from 10(8)/l to undetectable (<1) of 14 types of representative waterborne bacterial pathogens including Salmonella typhi and Vibrio cholerae. No Escherichia coli were detected post-treatment in 320 field water samples collected from five developing countries. In addition, the water treatment system reduced polio and rotavirus titres by greater than 4-log values. Cyrptosporidium parvum and Giardia lamblia inocula were reduced by greater than 3-log values following use of this water treatment system. Arsenic, added to laboratory test waters, was reduced by 99.8%, and naturally occurring arsenic in field samples from highly contaminated Bangladeshi wells was reduced by 99.5% to mean levels of 1.2 microg/l. This water treatment system has demonstrated the potential to provide improved drinking water to households in developing countries by removing microbial and arsenic contaminants.

The effect of antibacterial soap on impetigo incidence, Karachi, Pakistan.

We conducted a study to determine if soap containing 1.2% triclocarban would be effective in reducing the incidence of impetigo. We randomized 162 households in a low-income neighborhood of Karachi, Pakistan, to receive a regular supply of 1.2% triclocarban-containing soap (n = 81) or an identically appearing placebo (n = 81); 79 households in a nearby neighborhood were enrolled as standard practice controls. After adjustment for household clustering and covariates, the incidence of impetigo among children living in households receiving triclocarban-containing soap (1.10 episodes per 100 person-weeks) was 23% lower than in households receiving placebo soap (P = 0.28) and 43% lower than the standard habit and practice controls (P = 0.02). The routine use of triclocarban-containing soap by children living in a community with a high incidence of impetigo was associated with a reduced incidence of impetigo.

Hygienic hand antiseptics: should they not have activity and label claims against viruses?

Enteric and respiratory viruses are among the most frequent causes of human infections, and hands play an important role in the spread of these and many other viral diseases. Regular and proper hand hygiene by caregivers and food handlers in particular is essential to decontaminate hands and potentially interrupt such spread. What would be considered a proper decontamination of hands? Handwashing with regular soap and water is often considered sufficient, but what of hygienic handwash and handrub antiseptic products? Are they more effective? The evidence suggests that some clearly are. Activity against bacteria may not reflect the ability of hygienic hand antiseptics to deal with viruses, especially those that are nonenveloped. In spite of the acknowledged importance of hands as vehicles for viruses, there is a lack of suitable regulatory mechanism for handwash or handrub products to make claims of efficacy against viruses. This is in contrast with the ability of general-purpose disinfectants to make antiviral claims, although transmission of viruses from surfaces other than those of reusable medical devices may play only a minor role in virus transmission. This review discusses the (1). recent information on the relative importance of viruses as human pathogens, particularly those causing enteric and respiratory infections; (2). the survival of relevant viruses on human hands in comparison with common gram-negative and gram-positive bacteria; (3). the potential of hands to transfer or receive such contamination on casual contact; (4). role of hands in the spread of viruses; (5). the potential of hygienic measures to eliminate viruses from contaminated hands; (6). relative merits of available protocols to assess the activity of hygienic hand antiseptics against viruses; and (7). factors considered crucial in any tests to assess the activity of hygienic hand antiseptics against viruses. In addition, this review proposes surrogate viruses in such testing and discusses issues for additional consideration by researchers, manufacturers, end-users, and regulators.