Item request has been placed!
×
Item request cannot be made.
×
Processing Request
Centralized or Onsite Testing? Examining the Costs of Water Quality Monitoring in Rural Africa.
Item request has been placed!
×
Item request cannot be made.
×
Processing Request
- Additional Information
- Source:
Publisher: American Chemical Society Country of Publication: United States NLM ID: 0213155 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1520-5851 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 0013936X NLM ISO Abbreviation: Environ Sci Technol Subsets: MEDLINE
- Publication Information:
Publication: Washington DC : American Chemical Society
Original Publication: Easton, Pa. : American Chemical Society, c1967-
- Subject Terms:
- Abstract:
Rural water systems in Africa have room to improve water quality monitoring. However, the most cost-effective approach for microbial water testing remains uncertain. This study compared the cost per E. coli test (membrane filtration) of four approaches representing different levels of centralization: (i) one centralized laboratory serving all water systems, (ii) a mobile laboratory serving all systems, (iii) multiple semi-centralized laboratories serving clusters of systems, and (iv) decentralized analysis at each system. We employed Monte Carlo analyses to model the costs of these approaches in three real-world contexts in Ghana and Uganda and in hypothetical simulations capturing various conditions across rural Africa. Centralized testing was the lowest cost in two real-world settings and the widest variety of simulations, especially those with water systems close to a central laboratory (<36 km). Semi-centralized testing was the lowest cost in one real-world setting and in simulations with clustered water systems and intermediate sampling frequencies (1-2 monthly samples per system). The mobile lab was the lowest cost in the fewest simulations, requiring few systems and infrequent sampling. Decentralized testing was cost-effective for remote systems and frequent sampling, but only if sampling did not require a dedicated vehicle. Alternative low-cost testing methods could make decentralized testing more competitive.
- References:
Water Res. 2015 Sep 15;81:38-46. (PMID: 26026711)
Water Res. 2018 May 1;134:115-125. (PMID: 29407645)
Sci Total Environ. 2014 Jul 1;485-486:643-652. (PMID: 24747256)
Water Res. 2017 Mar 1;110:297-312. (PMID: 28038416)
J Microbiol Methods. 2014 Apr;99:66-70. (PMID: 24566129)
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2017 Apr;96(4):970-975. (PMID: 28500818)
Trop Med Int Health. 2018 May;23(5):508-525. (PMID: 29537671)
Trop Med Int Health. 2012 Jan;17(1):94-105. (PMID: 21951335)
Lancet Glob Health. 2019 Sep;7(9):e1247-e1256. (PMID: 31402005)
J Water Health. 2013 Jun;11(2):173-85. (PMID: 23708567)
Water (Basel). 2019;11(3):491. (PMID: 33552563)
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2015 Sep 02;12(9):10846-60. (PMID: 26404343)
Environ Sci Technol. 2020 Oct 6;54(19):12641-12653. (PMID: 32822180)
Environ Sci Technol. 2017 Jun 6;51(11):5869-5878. (PMID: 28459563)
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2016 Mar 02;13(3):. (PMID: 26950135)
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2014 Jul 18;11(7):7333-46. (PMID: 25046632)
Emerg Infect Dis. 2021 Jan;27(1):140-149. (PMID: 33350905)
Int J Hyg Environ Health. 2018 Jul;221(6):907-920. (PMID: 29861398)
Environ Sci Technol. 2016 Oct 18;50(20):10869-10876. (PMID: 27559754)
- Contributed Indexing:
Keywords: cost modeling; membrane filtration; rural water quality; safely managed water; water quality monitoring; water quality testing
- Publication Date:
Date Created: 20240614 Date Completed: 20240702 Latest Revision: 20240706
- Publication Date:
20240706
- Accession Number:
PMC11223485
- Accession Number:
10.1021/acs.est.4c01916
- Accession Number:
38872464
No Comments.