» Articles » PMID: 37581226

Tap Water Perceptions and Water Filter Use Vary with Socio-demographic Characteristics and Are Associated with Water and Sugar-sweetened Beverage Consumption in University Students

Overview
Date 2023 Aug 15
PMID 37581226
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: The goal of this study is to evaluate university students' perceptions of tap water safety and water filter use and determine how these perceptions and behaviours affect water and sugar-sweetened beverage intake.

Design: Cross-sectional; online survey conducted in Fall 2021.

Setting: A large, public Midwestern university in the USA.

Participants: Seven-hundred ninety-three university students.

Results: Students who experienced food insecurity, were on a Pell grant, were first-generation college students or were racial/ethnic minorities were less likely to trust tap water safety. Tap water filtration behaviour also varied by age and race/ethnicity. Students who did not agree with the statement 'my local tap water is safe to drink' had lower odds of consuming ≥ 3 cups of total water per day (OR = 0·45, 95 % CI: 0·32, 0·62), lower odds of consuming tap water ≥ 3 times/d (OR = 0·46, 95 % CI: 0·34, 0·64), higher odds of drinking bottled water ≥ 1 time per day (OR = 1·80, 95 % CI: 1·22, 2·66) and higher odds of drinking SSB ≥ 1 time per day (OR = 1·47, 95 % CI: 1·01, 2·14) than those who agreed. Students who always or sometimes filtered their tap water had lower odds of consuming ≥ 3 cups of total water per day (OR = 0·59, 95 % CI: 0·39, 0·90) than students who never filtered their tap water.

Conclusions: Tap water perceptions and behaviours affect tap and bottled water and SSB intake among university students. Tap water perceptions and behaviours in this demographic provide important context for university programming promoting healthy beverage initiatives.

References
1.
Rosinger A, Herrick K, Wutich A, Yoder J, Ogden C . Disparities in plain, tap and bottled water consumption among US adults: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2007-2014. Public Health Nutr. 2018; 21(8):1455-1464. PMC: 7474465. DOI: 10.1017/S1368980017004050. View

2.
Hedrick V, Savla J, Comber D, Flack K, Estabrooks P, Nsiah-Kumi P . Development of a brief questionnaire to assess habitual beverage intake (BEVQ-15): sugar-sweetened beverages and total beverage energy intake. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2012; 112(6):840-9. PMC: 3379009. DOI: 10.1016/j.jand.2012.01.023. View

3.
Patel A, Schmidt L . Healthy beverage initiatives in higher education: an untapped strategy for health promotion. Public Health Nutr. 2020; 24(1):136-138. PMC: 10195485. DOI: 10.1017/S1368980020003766. View

4.
Onufrak S, Park S, Sharkey J, Merlo C, Dean W, Sherry B . Perceptions of tap water and school water fountains and association with intake of plain water and sugar-sweetened beverages. J Sch Health. 2014; 84(3):195-204. PMC: 4559844. DOI: 10.1111/josh.12138. View

5.
Reese A, Burgos-Gil R, Cleary S, Lora K, Rivera I, Gittelsohn J . Use of a Water Filter at Home Reduces Sugary Drink Consumption among Parents and Infants/Toddlers in a Predominantly Hispanic Community: Results from the Water Up!@ Home Intervention Trial. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2022; 123(1):41-51. PMC: 9751227. DOI: 10.1016/j.jand.2022.06.006. View