Water Quality and Health Risks: An Assessment of Drinking Sources in Nigerian Universities
1
Department of Water Resources Management and Agrometeorology, Federal University of Agriculture, Abeokuta, Abeokuta, Nigeria
Popul. Med. 2026;8(Supplement Supplement 1):
ABSTRACT
ABSTRACT:
Unsafe drinking water in tertiary institutions undermines health and academic potential through preventable illness. In Southwestern Nigeria, where universities are densely populated and access to safe water is uneven, exposure to contaminated sources coincides with sanitation and hygiene deficits. This study examines water quality and health risks in student residences across six public universities, asking how “basic” service coverage masks water quality, sanitation, and hygiene shortfalls threatening student wellbeing and performance. Addressing water safety is critical for public health and sustainable development. A stratified design integrated groundwater sampling with a cross-sectional WASH (Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene) assessment. Twenty-seven water sources yielded 71 triplicate samples. Physicochemical parameters (pH, electrical conductivity, total dissolved solids) were measured in situ, while nitrate, chloride, and Escherichia coli were analysed using standard laboratory methods. Overall quality was assessed using the weighted arithmetic Water Quality Index (WQI), and health risk via Chronic Daily Intake (CDI) and Hazard Quotients (HQ). Multi-stage survey of 1,200 students documented water sources, access, sanitation sharing, and handwashing practices. Descriptive statistics explored associations. Although 81.25% of halls provided “basic” drinking-water services, hygiene facilities were limited by lack of soap. WQI showed variability: three institutions were “excellent,” two “good,” and one “poor.” pH was consistently acidic (<6.5), increasing corrosion risk, while other parameters met WHO guidelines. Low-level E. coli was detected in two institutions. CDI and HQ values were ≤1, indicating negligible non-carcinogenic risk. Behavioural patterns showed reliance on packaged water (63%) and communal taps (34%). Over half shared toilets at ratios exceeding ten users, while only 28% of handwashing points had water and soap. No gender differences were observed. Overall, “basic” coverage does not guarantee safety. Acidic water, intermittent contamination, overcrowded sanitation, and poor hygiene undermine student health and engagement. Universities should prioritize water treatment, sanitation expansion, soap provision, and routine WQI monitoring.
Unsafe drinking water in tertiary institutions undermines health and academic potential through preventable illness. In Southwestern Nigeria, where universities are densely populated and access to safe water is uneven, exposure to contaminated sources coincides with sanitation and hygiene deficits. This study examines water quality and health risks in student residences across six public universities, asking how “basic” service coverage masks water quality, sanitation, and hygiene shortfalls threatening student wellbeing and performance. Addressing water safety is critical for public health and sustainable development. A stratified design integrated groundwater sampling with a cross-sectional WASH (Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene) assessment. Twenty-seven water sources yielded 71 triplicate samples. Physicochemical parameters (pH, electrical conductivity, total dissolved solids) were measured in situ, while nitrate, chloride, and Escherichia coli were analysed using standard laboratory methods. Overall quality was assessed using the weighted arithmetic Water Quality Index (WQI), and health risk via Chronic Daily Intake (CDI) and Hazard Quotients (HQ). Multi-stage survey of 1,200 students documented water sources, access, sanitation sharing, and handwashing practices. Descriptive statistics explored associations. Although 81.25% of halls provided “basic” drinking-water services, hygiene facilities were limited by lack of soap. WQI showed variability: three institutions were “excellent,” two “good,” and one “poor.” pH was consistently acidic (<6.5), increasing corrosion risk, while other parameters met WHO guidelines. Low-level E. coli was detected in two institutions. CDI and HQ values were ≤1, indicating negligible non-carcinogenic risk. Behavioural patterns showed reliance on packaged water (63%) and communal taps (34%). Over half shared toilets at ratios exceeding ten users, while only 28% of handwashing points had water and soap. No gender differences were observed. Overall, “basic” coverage does not guarantee safety. Acidic water, intermittent contamination, overcrowded sanitation, and poor hygiene undermine student health and engagement. Universities should prioritize water treatment, sanitation expansion, soap provision, and routine WQI monitoring.
| eISSN: | 2654-1459 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
