3.9 Article

Rural children's exposure to well water contaminants: Implications in light of the American Academy of Pediatrics' recent policy statement

Journal

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-7599.2011.00609.x

Keywords

Pediatric; risk reduction; rural; water pollutants; water microbiology; water supply; standards; public health practice; child; health knowledge; attitude; practice

Funding

  1. NINR [R01NR009239, K01 NR009984]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: Implementing the recent American Academy of Pediatrics' (AAP) policy for annual well water testing will impact pediatric healthcare providers, who will be called upon for advice regarding testing, interpretation, and mitigation. We report findings from a study of low-income rural families' participation in household well water testing. Data sources: We collected data from 188 rural low-income households inclusive of 320 children under the age of seven. Participating families lived in one of two western U.S. counties and received water from a well with < 15 connections. Household water samples and questionnaire data were collected for analysis. Conclusions: Twenty-seven percent of households tested positive for at least one contaminant, including total coliforms (18%), arsenic (6%), synthetic organic chemicals (6%), nitrates (2%), fluoride (2%), and E. coli (< 1%). Eighty-nine percent of households testing positive for total coliforms were positive at re-test. Respondents expressed greatest concern for biological contamination and took multiple precautionary actions, although only 31% had ever tested their water for contaminants. Higher levels of education, income, and age, as well as homeowner status, were significantly associated with previous testing. Implications for practice: Recommendations for communicating abnormal results, mitigating risks, and overcoming logistical challenges are presented.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available