Farmworker Acceptability of Backpack Hydration Systems

ABSTRACT

Objective

To improve water access while working and contribute to fewer heat-related illnesses (HRI), backpack hydration systems were provided to over 200 farmworkers to use during the 2022 growing season. Acceptability of the water intake intervention was assessed among farmworkers in eastern North Carolina, USA.

Methods

With a pre-established community–university partnership, the acceptability of the intervention was assessed using a cross-sectional survey. The backpack brand selected included a 3-liter water bladder and attached drinking hose. Data analysis included descriptive and correlation statistics.

Results

Among 47 male, migrant farmworkers, most (90%) reported the hydration backpack to be acceptable or completely acceptable to workplace fluid intake. Most (53%) reported using the backpack some of the time, compared to 28% who used it often. The participants reported an average of 4.8 (SD 2.2) liters of water intake from the backpack on a typical workday. Most reported the backpack improved the quantity and frequency of their water consumption.

Conclusion

This study was an important first step in implementation of hydration backpack systems as an HRI-preventative intervention among farmworkers. Future interventional studies could assess the efficacy of the backpacks on health outcomes, including incidence of dehydration and symptoms of HRI.

KEYWORDS:

• Water intake
• heat illnesses
• agricultural workers
• acceptability
• intervention

Acknowledgments

We would like to acknowledge the farmworker participants, local growers, and Brayan Madero-Cortes, Angel Armenta, Randy Pacheco, and Caroline Doherty of Roanoke Chowan Community Health Center.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data availability statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, [EM], upon reasonable request.

Additional information

Funding

The research reported in this publication was supported in part by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number R25ES033452. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.