-
International Journal of Molecular... Jan 2024Hydrogen-rich water (HRW) has emerged as a novel approach in the field of health and wellness. It is believed to have therapeutic antioxidant properties that can... (Review)
Review
Hydrogen-rich water (HRW) has emerged as a novel approach in the field of health and wellness. It is believed to have therapeutic antioxidant properties that can neutralize harmful free radicals in the human body. It has also been shown to be beneficial in mitigating oxidative stress-induced damage through its anti-inflammatory and anti-apoptotic pathways. We aim to conduct a systematic review to evaluate the potential benefits of hydrogen-rich water. The review protocol was uploaded on PROSPERO. After the initial search criteria, the articles were reviewed by two blinded investigators, and a total of 25 articles were included in the systematic review. The potential benefits of hydrogen-rich water on various aspects of health, including exercise capacity, physical endurance, liver function, cardiovascular disease, mental health, COVID-19, oxidative stress, and anti-aging research, are a subject of growing interest and ongoing research. Although preliminary results in clinical trials and studies are encouraging, further research with larger sample sizes and rigorous methodologies is needed to substantiate these findings. Current research needs to fully explain the mechanisms behind the potential benefits of hydrogen-rich water. Continued scientific exploration will provide valuable insights into the potential of hydrogen-rich water as an adjunctive therapeutic approach in the future.
Topics: Humans; Health Status; Mental Health; Hydrogen; Water; Deception
PubMed: 38256045
DOI: 10.3390/ijms25020973 -
European Geriatric Medicine Oct 2022Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is highly common across the world. It is reported that over 90% of CAP in older adults may be due to aspiration. However, the... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is highly common across the world. It is reported that over 90% of CAP in older adults may be due to aspiration. However, the diagnostic criteria for aspiration pneumonia (AP) have not been widely agreed. Is there a consensus on how to diagnose AP? What are the clinical features of patients being diagnosed with AP? We conducted a systematic review to answer these questions.
METHODS
We performed a literature search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINHAL, and Cochrane to review the steps taken toward diagnosing AP. Search terms for "aspiration pneumonia" and "aged" were used. Inclusion criteria were: original research, community-acquired AP, age ≥ 75 years old, acute hospital admission.
RESULTS
A total of 10,716 reports were found. Following the removal of duplicates, 7601 were screened, 95 underwent full-text review, and 9 reports were included in the final analysis. Pneumonia was diagnosed using a combination of symptoms, inflammatory markers, and chest imaging findings in most studies. AP was defined as pneumonia with some relation to aspiration or dysphagia. Aspiration was inferred if there was witnessed or prior presumed aspiration, episodes of coughing on food or liquids, relevant underlying conditions, abnormalities on videofluoroscopy or water swallow test, and gravity-dependent distribution of shadows on chest imaging. Patients with AP were older, more frailer, and had more comorbidities than in non-AP.
CONCLUSION
There is a broad consensus on the clinical criteria to diagnose AP. It is a presumptive diagnosis with regards to patients' general frailty rather than in relation to swallowing function itself.
Topics: Aged; Community-Acquired Infections; Deglutition; Humans; Pneumonia; Pneumonia, Aspiration; Water
PubMed: 36008745
DOI: 10.1007/s41999-022-00689-3 -
Fluoride exposure and cognitive neurodevelopment: Systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis.Environmental Research Mar 2023Many uncertainties still surround the possible harmful effect of fluoride exposure on cognitive neurodevelopment in children. The aim of this systematic review and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Many uncertainties still surround the possible harmful effect of fluoride exposure on cognitive neurodevelopment in children. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to characterize this relation through a dose-response approach, by comparing the intelligence quotient (IQ) scores in the highest versus the lowest fluoride exposure category with a random-effects model, within a one-stage dose-response meta-analysis based on a cubic spline random-effects model. Out of 1996 potentially relevant literature records, 33 studies were eligible for this review, 30 of which were also suitable for meta-analysis. The summary mean difference of IQ score, comparing highest versus lowest fluoride categories and considering all types of exposure, was -4.68 (95% confidence interval-CI -6.45; -2.92), with a value of -5.60 (95% CI -7.76; -3.44) for drinking water fluoride and -3.84 (95% CI -7.93; 0.24) for urinary fluoride. Dose-response analysis showed a substantially linear IQ decrease for increasing water fluoride above 1 mg/L, with -3.05 (95% CI -4.06; -2.04) IQ points per 1 mg/L up to 2 mg/L, becoming steeper above such level. A weaker and substantially linear decrease of -2.15 (95% CI -4.48; 0.18) IQ points with increasing urinary fluoride emerged above 0.28 mg/L (approximately reflecting a water fluoride content of 0.7 mg/L). The inverse association between fluoride exposure and IQ was particularly strong in the studies at high risk of bias, while no adverse effect emerged in the only study judged at low risk of bias. Overall, most studies suggested an adverse effect of fluoride exposure on children's IQ, starting at low levels of exposure. However, a major role of residual confounding could not be ruled out, thus indicating the need of additional prospective studies at low risk of bias to conclusively assess the relation between fluoride exposure and cognitive neurodevelopment.
Topics: Child; Humans; Fluorides; Intelligence; Prospective Studies; Drinking Water; Cognition
PubMed: 36639015
DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2023.115239 -
Nutrients Feb 2023There has been an emerging concern that non-nutritive sweeteners (NNS) can increase the risk of cardiometabolic disease. Much of the attention has focused on acute... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
There has been an emerging concern that non-nutritive sweeteners (NNS) can increase the risk of cardiometabolic disease. Much of the attention has focused on acute metabolic and endocrine responses to NNS. To examine whether these mechanisms are operational under real-world scenarios, we conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis of acute trials comparing the effects of non-nutritive sweetened beverages (NNS beverages) with water and sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) in humans. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library were searched through to January 15, 2022. We included acute, single-exposure, randomized, and non-randomized, clinical trials in humans, regardless of health status. Three patterns of intake were examined: (1) uncoupling interventions, where NNS beverages were consumed alone without added energy or nutrients; (2) coupling interventions, where NNS beverages were consumed together with added energy and nutrients as carbohydrates; and (3) delayed coupling interventions, where NNS beverages were consumed as a preload prior to added energy and nutrients as carbohydrates. The primary outcome was a 2 h incremental area under the curve (iAUC) for blood glucose concentration. Secondary outcomes included 2 h iAUC for insulin, glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1), gastric inhibitory polypeptide (GIP), peptide YY (PYY), ghrelin, leptin, and glucagon concentrations. Network meta-analysis and confidence in the network meta-analysis (CINeMA) were conducted in R-studio and CINeMA, respectively. Thirty-six trials involving 472 predominantly healthy participants were included. Trials examined a variety of single NNS (acesulfame potassium, aspartame, cyclamate, saccharin, stevia, and sucralose) and NNS blends (acesulfame potassium + aspartame, acesulfame potassium + sucralose, acesulfame potassium + aspartame + cyclamate, and acesulfame potassium + aspartame + sucralose), along with matched water/unsweetened controls and SSBs sweetened with various caloric sugars (glucose, sucrose, and fructose). In uncoupling interventions, NNS beverages (single or blends) had no effect on postprandial glucose, insulin, GLP-1, GIP, PYY, ghrelin, and glucagon responses similar to water controls (generally, low to moderate confidence), whereas SSBs sweetened with caloric sugars (glucose and sucrose) increased postprandial glucose, insulin, GLP-1, and GIP responses with no differences in postprandial ghrelin and glucagon responses (generally, low to moderate confidence). In coupling and delayed coupling interventions, NNS beverages had no postprandial glucose and endocrine effects similar to controls (generally, low to moderate confidence). The available evidence suggests that NNS beverages sweetened with single or blends of NNS have no acute metabolic and endocrine effects, similar to water. These findings provide support for NNS beverages as an alternative replacement strategy for SSBs in the acute postprandial setting.
Topics: Humans; Sugar-Sweetened Beverages; Aspartame; Ghrelin; Glucagon; Cyclamates; Network Meta-Analysis; Blood Glucose; Glucose; Non-Nutritive Sweeteners; Beverages; Sucrose; Insulin; Sugars; Glucagon-Like Peptide 1; Water
PubMed: 36839408
DOI: 10.3390/nu15041050 -
JAMA Network Open Mar 2022There are concerns that low- and no-calorie sweetened beverages (LNCSBs) do not have established benefits, with major dietary guidelines recommending the use of water... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Association of Low- and No-Calorie Sweetened Beverages as a Replacement for Sugar-Sweetened Beverages With Body Weight and Cardiometabolic Risk: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
IMPORTANCE
There are concerns that low- and no-calorie sweetened beverages (LNCSBs) do not have established benefits, with major dietary guidelines recommending the use of water and not LNCSBs to replace sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs). Whether LNCSB as a substitute can yield similar improvements in cardiometabolic risk factors vs water in their intended substitution for SSBs is unclear.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the association of LNCSBs (using 3 prespecified substitutions of LNCSBs for SSBs, water for SSBs, and LNCSBs for water) with body weight and cardiometabolic risk factors in adults with and without diabetes.
DATA SOURCES
Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception through December 26, 2021.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) with at least 2 weeks of interventions comparing LNCSBs, SSBs, and/or water were included.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Data were extracted and risk of bias was assessed by 2 independent reviewers. A network meta-analysis was performed with data expressed as mean difference (MD) or standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% CIs. The GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) system was used to assess the certainty of the evidence.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcome was body weight. Secondary outcomes were other measures of adiposity, glycemic control, blood lipids, blood pressure, measures of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, and uric acid.
RESULTS
A total of 17 RCTs with 24 trial comparisons were included, involving 1733 adults (mean [SD] age, 33.1 [6.6] years; 1341 women [77.4%]) with overweight or obesity who were at risk for or had diabetes. Overall, LNCSBs were a substitute for SSBs in 12 RCTs (n = 601 participants), water was a substitute for SSBs in 3 RCTs (n = 429), and LNCSBs were a substitute for water in 9 RCTs (n = 974). Substitution of LNCSBs for SSBs was associated with reduced body weight (MD, -1.06 kg; 95% CI, -1.71 to -0.41 kg), body mass index (MD, -0.32; 95% CI, -0.58 to -0.07), percentage of body fat (MD, -0.60%; 95% CI, -1.03% to -0.18%), and intrahepatocellular lipid (SMD, -0.42; 95% CI, -0.70 to -0.14). Substituting water for SSBs was not associated with any outcome. There was also no association found between substituting LNCSBs for water with any outcome except glycated hemoglobin A1c (MD, 0.21%; 95% CI, 0.02% to 0.40%) and systolic blood pressure (MD, -2.63 mm Hg; 95% CI, -4.71 to -0.55 mm Hg). The certainty of the evidence was moderate (substitution of LNCSBs for SSBs) and low (substitutions of water for SSBs and LNCSBs for water) for body weight and was generally moderate for all other outcomes across all substitutions.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
This systematic review and meta-analysis found that using LNCSBs as an intended substitute for SSBs was associated with small improvements in body weight and cardiometabolic risk factors without evidence of harm and had a similar direction of benefit as water substitution. The evidence supports the use of LNCSBs as an alternative replacement strategy for SSBs over the moderate term in adults with overweight or obesity who are at risk for or have diabetes.
Topics: Adult; Body Weight; Cardiovascular Diseases; Diabetes Mellitus; Female; Humans; Male; Obesity; Overweight; Sugar-Sweetened Beverages; Water
PubMed: 35285920
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.2092 -
Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical... Jun 2022Water therapies as hydrotherapy, balneotherapy or aqua therapy are often used in the relief of disease- and treatment-associated symptoms of cancer patients. Yet, a... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Water therapies as hydrotherapy, balneotherapy or aqua therapy are often used in the relief of disease- and treatment-associated symptoms of cancer patients. Yet, a systematic review for the evidence of water therapy including all cancer entities has not been conducted to date.
PURPOSE
Oncological patients often suffer from symptoms which in patients with other diseases are successfully treated with water therapy. We want to gather more information about the benefits and risks of water therapy for cancer patients.
METHOD
In May 2020, a systematic search was conducted searching five electronic databases (Embase, Cochrane, PsychInfo, CINAHL and PubMed) to find studies concerning the use, effectiveness and potential harm of water therapy on cancer patients.
RESULTS
Of 3165 search results, 10 publications concerning 12 studies with 430 patients were included in this systematic review. The patients treated with water therapy were mainly diagnosed with breast cancer. The therapy concepts included aqua lymphatic therapy, aquatic exercises, foot bathes and whole-body bathes. Outcomes were state of lymphedema, quality of life, fatigue, BMI, vital parameters, anxiety and pain. The quality of the studies was assessed with the AMSTAR2-instrument, the SIGN-checklist and the IHE-Instruments. The studies had moderate quality and reported heterogeneous results. Some studies reported significantly improved quality of life, extent of lymphedema, neck and shoulder pain, fatigue and BMI while other studies did not find any changes concerning these endpoints.
CONCLUSION
Due to the very heterogeneous results and methodical limitations of the included studies, a clear statement regarding the effectiveness of water therapy on cancer patients is not possible.
Topics: Balneology; Breast Neoplasms; Fatigue; Female; Humans; Hydrotherapy; Lymphedema; Quality of Life; Water
PubMed: 35171330
DOI: 10.1007/s00432-022-03947-w -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2022Although various solutions have been recommended for cleansing wounds, normal saline is favoured as it is an isotonic solution and is not thought to interfere with the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Although various solutions have been recommended for cleansing wounds, normal saline is favoured as it is an isotonic solution and is not thought to interfere with the normal healing process. Tap water is commonly used in community settings for cleansing wounds because it is easily accessible, efficient and cost-effective; however, there is an unresolved debate about its use.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of water for wound cleansing.
SEARCH METHODS
For this fifth update, in May 2021 we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched clinical trials registries for ongoing and unpublished studies, and scanned reference lists of relevant included studies as well as reviews, meta-analyses and health technology reports to identify additional studies. There were no restrictions with respect to language, date of publication or study setting.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed wound cleansing using different types of water (e.g. tap water, distilled, boiled) compared with no cleansing or with other solutions (e.g. normal saline). For this update, we excluded quasi-RCTs, thereby removing some studies which had been included in the previous version of the review.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently carried out trial selection, data extraction and GRADE assessment of the certainty of evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 13 trials in this update including a total of 2504 participants ranging in age from two to 95 years. Participants in the trials experienced open fractures, surgical wounds, traumatic wounds, anal fissures and chronic wounds. The trials were conducted in six different countries with the majority conducted in India and the USA. Three trials involving 148 participants compared cleansing with tap water with no cleansing. Eight trials involving 2204 participants assessed cleansing with tap water compared with cleansing with normal saline. Two trials involving 152 participants assessed cleansing with distilled water compared with cleansing with normal saline. One trial involving 51 participants also assessed cleansing with cooled boiled water compared with cleansing with normal saline, and cleansing with distilled water compared with cleansing with cooled boiled water. Wound infection: no trials reported on wound infection for the comparison cleansing with tap water versus no cleansing. For all wounds, eight trials found the effect of cleansing with tap water compared with normal saline is uncertain (risk ratio (RR) 0.84, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.59 to 1.19); very low-certainty evidence. Two trials comparing the use of distilled water with normal saline for cleansing open fractures found that the effect on the number of fractures that were infected is uncertain (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.09); very low-certainty evidence. One trial compared the use of cooled boiled water with normal saline for cleansing open fractures and found that the effect on the number of fractures infected is uncertain (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.87); very low-certainty evidence. This trial also compared the use of distilled water with cooled boiled water and found that the effect on the number of fractures infected is uncertain (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.47); very low-certainty evidence. Wound healing: results from three trials comparing the use of tap water with no wound cleansing demonstrated there may be little or no difference in the number of wounds that did not heal between the groups (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.14); low-certainty evidence. The effect of tap water compared with normal saline is uncertain; two trials were pooled (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.07) but the certainty of the evidence is very low. Results from one study comparing the use of distilled water with normal saline for cleansing open fractures found that there may be little or no difference in the number of fractures that healed (RR could not be estimated, all wounds healed); the certainty of the evidence is low. Reduction in wound size: the effect of cleansing with tap water compared with normal saline on wound size reduction is uncertain (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.68); the certainty of the evidence is very low. Rate of wound healing: the effect of cleansing with tap water compared with normal saline on wound healing rate is uncertain (mean difference (MD) -3.06, 95% CI -6.70 to 0.58); the certainty of the evidence is very low.
COSTS
two trials reported cost analyses but the cost-effectiveness of tap water compared with the use of normal saline is uncertain; the certainty of the evidence is very low. Pain: results from one study comparing the use of tap water with no cleansing for acute and chronic wounds showed that there may be little or no difference in pain scores. The certainty of the evidence is low. Patient satisfaction: results from one study comparing the use of tap water with no cleansing for acute and chronic wounds showed that there may be little or no difference in patient satisfaction. The certainty of evidence is low. The effect of cleansing with tap water compared with normal saline is uncertain as the certainty of the evidence is very low.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
All the evidence identified in the review was low or very low certainty. Cleansing with tap water may make little or no difference to wound healing compared with no cleansing; there are no data relating to the impact on wound infection. The effects of cleansing with tap water, cooled boiled water or distilled water compared with cleansing with saline are uncertain, as is the effect of distilled water compared with cooled boiled water. Data for other outcomes are limited across all the comparisons considered and are either uncertain or suggest that there may be little or no difference in the outcome.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Child; Child, Preschool; Drinking Water; Fractures, Open; Humans; Middle Aged; Pain; Saline Solution; Sodium Chloride; Therapeutic Irrigation; Wound Infection; Young Adult
PubMed: 36103365
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003861.pub4 -
Environmental Research Jul 2022Pollution of water sources, largely from wide-scale agricultural fertilizer use has resulted in nitrate and nitrite contamination of drinking water. The effects on human... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Pollution of water sources, largely from wide-scale agricultural fertilizer use has resulted in nitrate and nitrite contamination of drinking water. The effects on human health of raised nitrate and nitrite levels in drinking water are currently unclear.
OBJECTIVES
We conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed literature on the association of nitrate and nitrite in drinking water with human health with a specific focus on cancer.
METHODS
We searched eight databases from 1 January 1990 until 28 February 2021. Meta-analyses were conducted when studies had the same exposure metric and outcome.
RESULTS
Of 9835 studies identified in the literature search, we found 111 studies reporting health outcomes, 60 of which reported cancer outcomes (38 case-control studies; 12 cohort studies; 10 other study designs). Most studies were set in the USA (24), Europe (20) and Taiwan (14), with only 3 studies from low and middle-income countries. Nitrate exposure in water (59 studies) was more commonly investigated than nitrite exposure (4 studies). Colorectal (15 studies) and gastric (13 studies) cancers were the most reported. In meta-analyses (4 studies) we identified a positive association of nitrate exposure with gastric cancer, OR = 1.91 (95%CI = 1.09-3.33) per 10 mg/L increment in nitrate ion. We found no association of nitrate exposure with colorectal cancer (10 studies; OR = 1.02 [95%CI = 0.96-1.08]) or cancers at any other site.
CONCLUSIONS
We identified an association of nitrate in drinking water with gastric cancer but with no other cancer site. There is currently a paucity of robust studies from settings with high levels nitrate pollution in drinking water. Research into this area will be valuable to ascertain the true health burden of nitrate contamination of water and the need for public policies to protect human health.
Topics: Drinking Water; Humans; Nitrates; Nitrites; Nitrogen Oxides; Stomach Neoplasms
PubMed: 35217009
DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2022.112988 -
Sports Medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) Jul 2022Studies investigating the effects of cold-water immersion (CWI) on the recovery of athletic performance, perceptual measures and creatine kinase (CK) have reported mixed... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Impact of Cold-Water Immersion Compared with Passive Recovery Following a Single Bout of Strenuous Exercise on Athletic Performance in Physically Active Participants: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis and Meta-regression.
BACKGROUND
Studies investigating the effects of cold-water immersion (CWI) on the recovery of athletic performance, perceptual measures and creatine kinase (CK) have reported mixed results in physically active populations.
OBJECTIVES
The purpose of this systematic review was to investigate the effects of CWI on recovery of athletic performance, perceptual measures and CK following an acute bout of exercise in physically active populations.
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic review with meta-analysis and meta-regression.
METHODS
A systematic search was conducted in September 2021 using Medline, SPORTDiscus, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, EmCare and Embase databases. Studies were included if they were peer reviewed and published in English, included participants who were involved in sport or deemed physically active, compared CWI with passive recovery methods following an acute bout of strenuous exercise and included athletic performance, athlete perception and CK outcome measures. Studies were divided into two strenuous exercise subgroups: eccentric exercise and high-intensity exercise. Random effects meta-analyses were used to determine standardised mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals. Meta-regression analyses were completed with water temperature and exposure durations as continuous moderator variables.
RESULTS
Fifty-two studies were included in the meta-analyses. CWI improved the recovery of muscular power 24 h after eccentric exercise (SMD 0.34 [95% CI 0.06-0.62]) and after high-intensity exercise (SMD 0.22 [95% CI 0.004-0.43]), and reduced serum CK (SMD - 0.85 [95% CI - 1.61 to - 0.08]) 24 h after high-intensity exercise. CWI also improved muscle soreness (SMD - 0.89 [95% CI - 1.48 to - 0.29]) and perceived feelings of recovery (SMD 0.66 [95% CI 0.29-1.03]) 24 h after high-intensity exercise. There was no significant influence on the recovery of strength performance following either eccentric or high-intensity exercise. Meta-regression indicated that shorter time and lower temperatures were related to the largest beneficial effects on serum CK (duration and temperature dose effects) and endurance performance (duration dose effects only) after high-intensity exercise.
CONCLUSION
CWI was an effective recovery tool after high-intensity exercise, with positive outcomes occurring for muscular power, muscle soreness, CK, and perceived recovery 24 h after exercise. However, after eccentric exercise, CWI was only effective for positively influencing muscular power 24 h after exercise. Dose-response relationships emerged for positively influencing endurance performance and reducing serum CK, indicating that shorter durations and lower temperatures may improve the efficacy of CWI if used after high-intensity exercise.
FUNDING
Emma Moore is supported by a Research Training Program (Domestic) Scholarship from the Australian Commonwealth Department of Education and Training.
PROTOCOL REGISTRATION
Open Science Framework: 10.17605/OSF.IO/SRB9D.
Topics: Athletic Performance; Cold Temperature; Creatine Kinase; Humans; Immersion; Myalgia; Water
PubMed: 35157264
DOI: 10.1007/s40279-022-01644-9 -
Lancet (London, England) Jul 2022Estimates of the effectiveness of water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) interventions that provide high levels of service on childhood diarrhoea are scarce. We aimed to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Effectiveness of interventions to improve drinking water, sanitation, and handwashing with soap on risk of diarrhoeal disease in children in low-income and middle-income settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Estimates of the effectiveness of water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) interventions that provide high levels of service on childhood diarrhoea are scarce. We aimed to provide up-to-date estimates on the burden of disease attributable to WASH and on the effects of different types of WASH interventions on childhood diarrhoea in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs).
METHODS
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we updated previous reviews following their search strategy by searching MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and BIOSIS Citation Index for studies of basic WASH interventions and of WASH interventions providing a high level of service, published between Jan 1, 2016, and May 25, 2021. We included randomised and non-randomised controlled trials conducted at household or community level that matched exposure categories of the so-called service ladder approach of the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) for WASH. Two reviewers independently extracted study-level data and assessed risk of bias using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and certainty of evidence using a modified Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. We analysed extracted relative risks (RRs) and 95% CIs using random-effects meta-analyses and meta-regression models. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42016043164.
FINDINGS
19 837 records were identified from the search, of which 124 studies were included, providing 83 water (62 616 children), 20 sanitation (40 799 children), and 41 hygiene (98 416 children) comparisons. Compared with untreated water from an unimproved source, risk of diarrhoea was reduced by up to 50% with water treated at point of use (POU): filtration (n=23 studies; RR 0·50 [95% CI 0·41-0·60]), solar treatment (n=13; 0·63 [0·50-0·80]), and chlorination (n=25; 0·66 [0·56-0·77]). Compared with an unimproved source, provision of an improved drinking water supply on premises with higher water quality reduced diarrhoea risk by 52% (n=2; 0·48 [0·26-0·87]). Overall, sanitation interventions reduced diarrhoea risk by 24% (0·76 [0·61-0·94]). Compared with unimproved sanitation, providing sewer connection reduced diarrhoea risk by 47% (n=5; 0·53 [0·30-0·93]). Promotion of handwashing with soap reduced diarrhoea risk by 30% (0·70 [0·64-0·76]).
INTERPRETATION
WASH interventions reduced risk of diarrhoea in children in LMICs. Interventions supplying either water filtered at POU, higher water quality from an improved source on premises, or basic sanitation services with sewer connection were associated with increased reductions. Our results support higher service levels called for under SDG 6. Notably, no studies evaluated interventions that delivered access to safely managed WASH services, the level of service to which universal coverage by 2030 is committed under the SDG.
FUNDING
WHO, Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office, and National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences.
Topics: Child; Diarrhea; Drinking Water; Hand Disinfection; Humans; Sanitation; Soaps
PubMed: 35780792
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00937-0