Search

Wastewater based epidemiology (WBE) is increasingly used to provide decision makers with actionable data about community health. WBE efforts to date have primarily focused on sewer-transported wastewater in high-income countries, but at least 1.8 billion people in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) use onsite sanitation systems such as pit latrines and septic tanks. Like wastewater, fecal sludges from such systems offer similar advantages in community pathogen monitoring and other epidemiological applications. To evaluate the distribution of enteric pathogens inside pit latrines–which could inform sampling methods for WBE in LMIC settings unserved by sewers–we collected fecal sludges from the surface, mid-point, and maximum-depth of 33 pit latrines in urban and peri-urban Malawi and analyzed the 99 samples for 20 common enteric pathogens via multiplex quantitative reverse transcription PCR. Using logistic regression adjusted for household population, latrine sharing, the presence of a concrete floor or slab, water source, and anal cleansing materials, we found no significant difference in the odds of detecting the 20 pathogens from the mid-point (adjusted odds ratio, aOR = 1.1; 95% confidence interval = 0.73, 1.6) and surface samples (aOR = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.54, 1.2) compared with those samples taken from the maximum depth. Our results suggest that, for the purposes of routine pathogen monitoring, pit latrine sampling depth does not strongly influence the odds of detecting enteric pathogens by molecular methods. A single sample from the pit latrines' surface, or a composite of surface samples, may be preferred as the most recent material contributed to the pit and may be easiest to collect. Author summary: Almost two billion people defecate into onsite sanitation facilities such as pit latrines. Evidence suggests these individuals are often at a disproportionately high risk of enteric infection compared to those served by piped sewerage. Public health surveillance in high-risk communities could monitor key pathogens in fecal sludges to inform which pathogens are circulating among those contributing waste. Representative surveys including multiple latrines could inform vaccination campaigns and interventions to limit the transmission of these pathogens, including eradication efforts, at a localized scale. A better understanding of how enteric pathogen detection may vary by pit latrine sampling depth would be useful to inform methods for fecal sludge collection. To refine methods for sampling in such surveys, we collected fecal sludges from the surface, mid-point, and maximum depth of pit latrines in Malawi. We found pit latrine depth did not significantly affect enteric pathogen detection by the methods we used. However, surface samples may be preferred due to their ease of collection and because the most recently deposited fecal material may be of greater interest in surveillance efforts that aim to inform pathogen carriage at the time of sampling. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents the results of a mixed-methods study examining adaptation strategies that property owners in low-income, rapidly urbanizing areas in Malawi adopt to address the limitations of pit latrines, the most common method of disposing human excreta. A particular challenge is lack of space for constructing new latrines as population density increases: traditional practice has been to cap full pits and simply move to a new site, but increasing demands on space require new approaches to extend the service life of latrines. In this context, we collected data on sanitation technology choices from January to September 2013 through 48 in-depth interviews and a stated preference survey targeting 1,300 property owners from 27 low-income urban areas. Results showed that property owners with concern about space for replacing pit latrines were 1.8 times more likely to select pit emptying service over the construction of new pit latrines with a slab floor (p = 0.02) but there was no significant association between concern about space for replacing pit latrines and intention to adopt locally promoted, novel sanitation technology known as ecological sanitation (ecosan). Property owners preferred to adapt existing, known technology by constructing replacement pit latrines on old pit latrine locations, reducing the frequency of replacing pit latrines, or via emptying pit latrines when full. This study highlights potential challenges to adoption of wholly new sanitation technologies, even when they present clear advantages to end users. To scale, alternative sanitation technologies for rapidly urbanising cities should offer clear advantages, be affordable, be easy to use when shared among multiple households, and their design should be informed by existing adaptation strategies and local knowledge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]