Treatment of severe and moderate acute malnutrition in low- and middle-income settings: a systematic review, meta-analysis and Delphi process
Open Access
- 17 September 2013
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Springer Science and Business Media LLC in BMC Public Health
- Vol. 13 (S3), S23
- https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-13-s3-s23
Abstract
Globally, moderate acute malnutrition (MAM) and severe acute malnutrition (SAM) affect approximately 52 million children under five. This systematic review evaluates the effectiveness of interventions for SAM including the World Health Organization (WHO) protocol for inpatient management and community-based management with ready-to-use-therapeutic food (RUTF), as well as interventions for MAM in children under five years in low- and middle-income countries. We systematically searched the literature and included 14 studies in the meta-analysis. Study quality was assessed using CHERG adaptation of GRADE criteria. A Delphi process was undertaken to complement the systematic review in estimating case fatality and recovery rates that were necessary for modelling in the Lives Saved Tool (LiST). Case fatality rates for inpatient treatment of SAM using the WHO protocol ranged from 3.4% to 35%. For community-based treatment of SAM, children given RUTF were 51% more likely to achieve nutritional recovery than the standard care group. For the treatment of MAM, children in the RUSF group were significantly more likely to recover and less likely to be non-responders than in the CSB group. In both meta-analyses, weight gain in the intervention group was higher, and although statistically significant, these differences were small. Overall limitations in our analysis include considerable heterogeneity in many outcomes and an inability to evaluate intervention effects separate from commodity effect. The Delphi process indicated that adherence to standardized protocols for the treatment of SAM and MAM should have a marked positive impact on mortality and recovery rates; yet, true consensus was not achieved. Gaps in our ability to estimate effectiveness of overall treatment approaches for SAM and MAM persist. In addition to further impact studies conducted in a wider range of settings, more high quality program evaluations need to be conducted and the results disseminated.This publication has 58 references indexed in Scilit:
- Do Children with Uncomplicated Severe Acute Malnutrition Need Antibiotics? A Systematic Review and Meta-AnalysisPLOS ONE, 2013
- Antibiotics in severely malnourished children: systematic review of efficacy, safety and pharmacokineticsBulletin of the World Health Organization, 2011
- Methods used in the Lives Saved Tool (LiST)BMC Public Health, 2011
- A Ready-To-Use Therapeutic Food Containing 10% Milk Is Less Effective Than One with 25% Milk in the Treatment of Severely Malnourished ChildrenJournal of Nutrition, 2010
- Standards for CHERG reviews of intervention effects on child survivalInternational Journal of Epidemiology, 2010
- Supplementary Feeding with Fortified Spreads Results in Higher Recovery Rates Than with a Corn/Soy Blend in Moderately Wasted ChildrenJournal of Nutrition, 2009
- What works? Interventions for maternal and child undernutrition and survivalThe Lancet, 2008
- Maternal and child undernutrition: global and regional exposures and health consequencesThe Lancet, 2008
- WHO guidelines for severe malnutrition: are they feasible in rural African hospitals?Archives of Disease in Childhood, 2007
- Children with Severe Malnutrition: Can Those at Highest Risk of Death Be Identified with the WHO Protocol?PLoS Medicine, 2006