Arsenic field test kits are widely used to measure arsenic levels in drinking water sources, especially in countries like Bangladesh, where water supply is highly decentralized and water quality testing infrastructure is limited. From a public health perspective, the ability of a measurement technique to distinguish samples above and below relevant and actionable drinking water standards is paramount. In this study, the performance of eight commercially available field test kits was assessed by comparing kit estimates to hydride generation atomic absorption spectroscopy (HG-AAS) analyses. The results of tests that control for user-dependent color matching errors showed that two kits (LaMotte and Quick II kits) provided accurate and precise estimates of arsenic, four kits (Econo-Quick, Quick, Wagtech and Merck kits) were either accurate or precise, but not both, and two kits (Hach and Econo-Quick II kits) were neither accurate nor precise. Tests were performed for arsenic concentration ranges commonly found in natural waters and treated waters (such as community drinking water filter systems), and also on laboratory generated arsenic standards in DI water. For those kits that did not perform well, test strips often produced colors too light compared to manufacturer-provided arsenic color calibration charts. Based on these results, we recommend stakeholders carefully re-consider the use of poorly performing field test kits until better quality control of components of these kits is implemented. In addition, we recommend that field test kit manufacturers provide suitable internal standards in every kit box for users to verify the veracity of manufacturer provided color charts.
Keywords: Arsenic; Bangladesh; Color matching; Field kit; Test kit.
Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.