In Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) outbreaks, it is widely recommended to wash living things (handwashing) with 0.05% (500 mg/L) chlorine solution and non-living things (surfaces, personal protective equipment, dead bodies) with 0.5% (5,000 mg/L) chlorine solution. Chlorine solutions used in EVD response are primarily made from powdered calcium hypochlorite (HTH), granular sodium dichloroisocyanurate (NaDCC), and liquid sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl), and have a pH range of 5–11. Chlorine solutions degrade following a reaction highly dependent on, and unusually sensitive to, pH, temperature, and concentration. We determined the shelf-life of 0.05% and 0.5% chlorine solutions used in EVD response, including HTH, NaDCC, stabilized NaOCl, generated NaOCl, and neutralized NaOCl solutions. Solutions were stored for 30 days at 25, 30, and 35°C, and tested daily for chlorine concentration and pH. Maximum shelf-life was defined as days until initial concentration fell to <90% of initial concentration in ideal laboratory conditions. At 25–35°C, neutralized-NaOCl solutions (pH = 7) had a maximum shelf-life of a few hours, NaDCC solutions (pH = 6) 2 days, generated NaOCl solutions (pH = 9) 6 days, and HTH and stabilized NaOCl solutions (pH 9–11) >30 days. Models were developed for solutions with maximum shelf-lives between 1–30 days. Extrapolating to 40°C, the maximum predicted shelf-life for 0.05% and 0.5% NaDCC solutions were 0.38 and 0.82 hours, respectively; predicted shelf-life for 0.05% and 0.5% generated NaOCl solutions were >30 and 5.4 days, respectively. Each chlorine solution type offers advantages and disadvantages to responders, as: NaDCC is an easy-to-import high-concentration effervescent powder; HTH is similar, but forms a precipitate that may clog pipes; and, NaOCl solutions can be made locally, but are difficult to transport. We recommend responders chose the most appropriate source chlorine compound for their use, and ensure solutions are stored at appropriate temperatures and used or replaced before expiring.

BackgroundFrom December 2014 to September 2016, a cholera outbreak in Kenya, the largest since 2010, caused 16,840 reported cases and 256 deaths. The outbreak affected 30 of Kenya’s 47 counties and occurred shortly after the decentralization of many healthcare services to the county level. This mixed-methods study, conducted June–July 2015, assessed cholera preparedness in Homa Bay, Nairobi, and Mombasa counties and explored clinic- and community-based health care workers’ (HCW) experiences during outbreak response.MethodsCounties were selected based on cumulative cholera burden and geographic characteristics. We conducted 44 health facility cholera preparedness checklists (according to national guidelines) and 8 focus group discussions (FGDs). Frequencies from preparedness checklists were generated. To determine key themes from FGDs, inductive and deductive codes were applied; MAX software for qualitative data analysis (MAXQDA) was used to identify patterns.ResultsSome facilities lacked key materials for treating cholera patients, diagnosing cases, and maintaining infection control. Overall, 82% (36/44) of health facilities had oral rehydration salts, 65% (28/43) had IV fluids, 27% (12/44) had rectal swabs, 11% (5/44) had Cary-Blair transport media, and 86% (38/44) had gloves. A considerable number of facilities lacked disease reporting forms (34%, 14/41) and cholera treatment guidelines (37%, 16/43). In FDGs, HCWs described confusion regarding roles and reporting during the outbreak, which highlighted issues in coordination and management structures within the health system. Similar to checklist findings, FGD participants described supply challenges affecting laboratory preparedness and infection prevention and control. Perceived successes included community engagement, health education, strong collaboration between clinic and community HCWs, and HCWs’ personal passion to help others.ConclusionsThe confusion over roles, reporting, and management found in this evaluation highlights a need to adapt, implement, and communicate health strategies at the county level, in order to inform and train HCWs during health system transformations. International, national, and county stakeholders could strengthen preparedness and response for cholera and other public health emergencies in Kenya, and thereby strengthen global health security, through further investment in the existing Integrated Disease Surveillance and Response structure and national cholera prevention and control plan, and the adoption of county-specific cholera control plans.

To prevent disease transmission, 0.05% chlorine solution is commonly recommended for handwashing in Ebola Treatment Units. In the 2014 West Africa outbreak this recommendation was widely extended to community settings, although many organizations recommend soap and hand sanitizer over chlorine. To evaluate skin irritation caused by frequent handwashing that may increase transmission risk in Ebola-affected communities, we conducted a randomized trial with 91 subjects who washed their hands 10 times a day for 28 days. Subjects used soap and water, sanitizer, or one of four chlorine solutions used by Ebola responders (calcium hypochlorite (HTH), sodium dichloroisocyanurate (NaDCC), and generated or pH-stabilized sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl)). Outcomes were self-reported hand feel, irritation as measured by the Hand Eczema Score Index (HECSI) (range 0–360), signs of transmission risk (e.g., cracking), and dermatitis diagnosis. All groups experienced statistically significant increases in HECSI score. Subjects using sanitizer had the smallest increases, followed by higher pH chlorine solutions (HTH and stabilized NaOCl), and soap and water. The greatest increases were among neutral pH chlorine solutions (NaDCC and generated NaOCl). Signs of irritation related to higher transmission risk were observed most frequently in subjects using soap and least frequently by those using sanitizer or HTH. Despite these irritation increases, all methods represented minor changes in HECSI score. Average HECSI score was only 9.10 at endline (range 1–33) and 4% (4/91) of subjects were diagnosed with dermatitis, one each in four groups. Each handwashing method has benefits and drawbacks: soap is widely available and inexpensive, but requires water and does not inactivate the virus; sanitizer is easy-to use and effective but expensive and unacceptable to many communities, and chlorine is easy-to-use but difficult to produce properly and distribute. Overall, we recommend Ebola responders and communities use whichever handwashing method(s) are most acceptable, available, and sustainable for community handwashing.Trial Registration: International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Registry ISRCTN89815514

To prevent transmission in Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) outbreaks, it is recommended to disinfect living things (hands and people) with 0.05% chlorine solution and non-living things (surfaces, personal protective equipment, dead bodies) with 0.5% chlorine solution. In the current West African EVD outbreak, these solutions (manufactured from calcium hypochlorite (HTH), sodium dichloroisocyanurate (NaDCC), and sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl)) have been widely used in both Ebola Treatment Unit and community settings. To ensure solution quality, testing is necessary, however test method appropriateness for these Ebola-relevant concentrations has not previously been evaluated. We identified fourteen commercially-available methods to test Ebola-relevant chlorine solution concentrations, including two titration methods, four DPD dilution methods, and six test strips. We assessed these methods by: 1) determining accuracy and precision by measuring in quintuplicate five different 0.05% and 0.5% chlorine solutions manufactured from NaDCC, HTH, and NaOCl; 2) conducting volunteer testing to assess ease-of-use; and, 3) determining costs. Accuracy was greatest in titration methods (reference-12.4% error compared to reference method), then DPD dilution methods (2.4–19% error), then test strips (5.2–48% error); precision followed this same trend. Two methods had an accuracy of <10% error across all five chlorine solutions with good precision: Hach digital titration for 0.05% and 0.5% solutions (recommended for contexts with trained personnel and financial resources), and Serim test strips for 0.05% solutions (recommended for contexts where rapid, inexpensive, and low-training burden testing is needed). Measurement error from test methods not including pH adjustment varied significantly across the five chlorine solutions, which had pH values 5–11. Volunteers found test strip easiest and titration hardest; costs per 100 tests were $14–37 for test strips and $33–609 for titration. Given the ease-of-use and cost benefits of test strips, we recommend further development of test strips robust to pH variation and appropriate for Ebola-relevant chlorine solution concentrations.

After the January 2010 earthquake in Haiti, an existing development program promoting household water treatment with chlorine rapidly expanded and provided relief to 15,000 earthquake-affected households. Initially, 157 community health workers (CHWs) distributed chlorine tablets; ten months later, CHWs began selling locally manufactured solution. The program was externally evaluated in March and November 2010; 77–90% of recipients had free chlorine residual (FCR) in household water. Internal monitoring by three supervisors and 157 CHWs also began in 2010. We analyzed results from 9,832 supervisor and 80,371 CHW monitoring visits conducted between 2010 and 2014 to assess: whether success continued in the rehabilitation phase; internal data validity; and factors impacting adoption. In 2010, 72.7% of supervisor visits documented total chlorine residual (TCR) comparable to external evaluation results. TCR presence was associated with certain supervisors/CHWs, earlier program year and month (in 2014, supervisor visits TCR presence dropped to 52.1%), living in plains (not mountainous) regions, and certain calendar months. CHW visits recorded 18.1% higher TCR presence than supervisor visits, indicating bias. Our results document a program with sustained (although slightly declining) household chlorination use, provide insight into validity in internal monitoring, and inform discussions on the value of linking successful development programs to emergency relief, rehabilitation, and development.