Exploring the determinants and indicators of poultry feces management behaviors in rural Western Uganda

Multilevel factors drive child exposure to enteric pathogens in animal feces: A qualitative study in northwestern coastal Ecuador

Exposure to animal feces and associated enteric pathogens poses significant risks to child health. However, public health strategies to mitigate enteric infections among children largely aim to reduce exposure to human feces, overlooking transmission pathways related to animal feces. In this study we examine if and how children are exposed to enteric pathogens in animal feces in northwestern coastal Ecuador. We conducted qualitative interviews with mothers of children aged 10-18 months that owned (n = 32) and did not own (n = 26) animals in urban and rural communities. Using thematic analysis, we identified community, household, and child behavioral factors that influence exposure. We also compared child exposure by household animal ownership. Our findings revealed myriad opportunities for young children to be exposed to enteric pathogens in many locations and from multiple animal sources, regardless of household animal ownership. Animal feces management practices (AFM) used by mothers, such as rinsing feces into ditches and throwing feces into surrounding areas, may increase environmental contamination outside their homes and in their communities. Unsafe AFM practices were similar to unsafe child feces management practices reported in other studies, including practices related to defecation location, feces removal and disposal, environmental contamination cleaning, and handwashing. Findings suggest that animal feces may contaminate the environment along similar pathways as human feces. Identification and incorporation of safe AFM practices, similar to those developed for child feces management, would 1) mitigate child exposure to enteric pathogens by reducing animal feces contamination in domestic and public spaces; and 2) enable an integrated approach to address enteric pathogen exposure pathways related to animal and child feces.

Measurement in the study of human exposure to animal feces: A systematic review and audit

BACKGROUND

Human exposure to animal feces is increasingly recognized as an important transmission route of enteric pathogens. Yet, there are no consistent or standardized approaches to measurement of this exposure, limiting assessment of the human health effects and scope of the issue.

OBJECTIVE

To inform and improve approaches to the measurement of human exposure to animal feces, we audited existing measurement in low- and middle-income countries.

METHODS

We systematically searched peer-reviewed and gray literature databases for studies with quantitative measures of human exposure to animal feces and we classified measures in two ways. First, using a novel conceptual model, we categorized measures into three 'Exposure Components' identified a priori (i.e., Animal, Environmental, Human Behavioral); one additional Component (Evidence of Exposure) inductively emerged. Second, using the exposure science conceptual framework, we determined where measures fell along the source-to-outcome continuum.

RESULTS

We identified 1,428 measures across 184 included studies. Although studies overwhelmingly included more than one single-item measure, the majority only captured one Exposure Component. For example, many studies used several single-item measures to capture the same attribute for different animals, all of which were classified as the same Component. Most measures captured information about the source (e.g. animal presence) and contaminant (e.g. animal-sourced pathogens), which are most distal from exposure on the source-to-outcome continuum.

DISCUSSION

We found that measurement of human exposure to animal feces is diverse and largely distal from exposure. To facilitate better assessment of the human health effects of exposure and scope of the issue, rigorous and consistent measures are needed. We recommend a list of key factors from the Animal, Environmental, and Human Behavioral Exposure Components to measure. We also propose using the exposure science conceptual framework to identify proximal measurement approaches.

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.