Indian journal of pediatrics · 2023
Comparison of Nutritional Status of Healthy Under-Five Indian Children Using Composite Index of Anthropometric Failure on WHO 2006 versus 2019 Indian Synthetic Growth Charts.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Mondkar Shruti A, Khadilkar Vaman, Jahagirdar Rahul, Kore Vrushali, Yewale Sushil, Dange Nimisha, More Chidvilas, Khadilkar Anuradha
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To assess nutritional status of apparently-healthy under-five Indian children using Composite Index of Anthropometric Failure (CIAF) and to compare anthropometric failure prevalence using conventional indices and CIAF on World Health Organization (WHO) vs. synthetic Indian growth charts.
METHODS: This observational study was conducted over 2 y. The inclusion criteria was apparently-healthy children (0-60 mo) and the exclusion criteria were acute/chronic illness and small for gestational age.
RESULTS: A total of 1557 children (762 girls) were included in the study. The mean age of the subjects was 21 mo. The Z-scores for height, weight, body mass index (BMI) for age and weight for height in children were lower on WHO vs. synthetic charts (p = 0.0001). Significantly higher proportion of children were moderately and severely underweight, stunted and wasted on WHO charts. Synthetic charts identified significantly higher proportion as normal for weight, height, BMI for age, weight for height, overweight (overall), and a higher prevalence of severe stunting, and severe acute malnutrition (SAM) was noted among girls compared to boys. Using CIAF, 54.1% children were normal on WHO charts vs. 78.0% on synthetic (p = 0.0001). Larger proportion of girls (8.8%) were stunted+underweight (category-E) vs. boys (4.3%) on synthetic charts (p = 0.0003). Significantly higher proportion of children demonstrated failure (single/dual/multiple) on WHO charts except category-Y (higher proportion of underweight on synthetic charts). Maximum difference in CIAF (WHO vs. synthetic) was observed between 0-24 mo age. Of 1215 children normal on synthetic charts, 837 (68.9%) were normal on WHO charts. Of 116 underweight children (category-Y) on synthetic charts, 20 (17.2%) were underweight on WHO charts; remaining had compound failure (wasting+underweight = 49.1%, wasting+stunting+underweight = 14.7%, stunting+underweight = 12.1%) on WHO charts. Among those stunted+underweight (category-E) on synthetic charts, WHO charts classified 1/4th as wasted+stunted+underweight (category-D).
CONCLUSIONS: Synthetic references are more representative of Indian growth patterns, and seem more appropriate for monitoring growth of Indian children to avoid mislabelling as malnourished.
METHODS: This observational study was conducted over 2 y. The inclusion criteria was apparently-healthy children (0-60 mo) and the exclusion criteria were acute/chronic illness and small for gestational age.
RESULTS: A total of 1557 children (762 girls) were included in the study. The mean age of the subjects was 21 mo. The Z-scores for height, weight, body mass index (BMI) for age and weight for height in children were lower on WHO vs. synthetic charts (p = 0.0001). Significantly higher proportion of children were moderately and severely underweight, stunted and wasted on WHO charts. Synthetic charts identified significantly higher proportion as normal for weight, height, BMI for age, weight for height, overweight (overall), and a higher prevalence of severe stunting, and severe acute malnutrition (SAM) was noted among girls compared to boys. Using CIAF, 54.1% children were normal on WHO charts vs. 78.0% on synthetic (p = 0.0001). Larger proportion of girls (8.8%) were stunted+underweight (category-E) vs. boys (4.3%) on synthetic charts (p = 0.0003). Significantly higher proportion of children demonstrated failure (single/dual/multiple) on WHO charts except category-Y (higher proportion of underweight on synthetic charts). Maximum difference in CIAF (WHO vs. synthetic) was observed between 0-24 mo age. Of 1215 children normal on synthetic charts, 837 (68.9%) were normal on WHO charts. Of 116 underweight children (category-Y) on synthetic charts, 20 (17.2%) were underweight on WHO charts; remaining had compound failure (wasting+underweight = 49.1%, wasting+stunting+underweight = 14.7%, stunting+underweight = 12.1%) on WHO charts. Among those stunted+underweight (category-E) on synthetic charts, WHO charts classified 1/4th as wasted+stunted+underweight (category-D).
CONCLUSIONS: Synthetic references are more representative of Indian growth patterns, and seem more appropriate for monitoring growth of Indian children to avoid mislabelling as malnourished.