Child nutritional status as screening tool for identifying undernourished mothers: an observational study of mother-child dyads in Mogadishu, Somalia, from November 2019 to March 2020.
malnutrition
nutrition assessment
Journal
BMJ nutrition, prevention & health
ISSN: 2516-5542
Titre abrégé: BMJ Nutr Prev Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101769223
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
04
05
2021
accepted:
31
08
2021
entrez:
14
1
2022
pubmed:
15
1
2022
medline:
15
1
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Active screening of only pregnant and lactating mothers (PLMs) excludes other mothers of reproductive age susceptible to undernutrition. Our analysis evaluated if mothers presenting with wasted children were more likely to be undernourished themselves. The observational study enrolled mother and child dyads presenting to an outpatient facility in Mogadishu, Somalia, between November 2019 and March 2020. Trained nurses recorded lower extremity oedema for children aged 6-59 months, parity and gestational status for women aged 19-50 years and age, access to care, height/length, mid-upper arm circumference (MUAC) and weight for both. Weight-for-height z-score (WHZ) for children and body mass index (BMI) for mothers were calculated using standard procedures. Wasting was defined as WHZ <-2, MUAC <12.5 cm and/or presence of oedema for children. Undernutrition was defined as MUAC <23 cm for PLMs and BMI <18.5 kg/m A total of 93.6% (2142/2288) of enrolled dyads met inclusion criteria. Wasting was observed among 57.5% of children; 20.2% of pregnant mothers, 20.0% of lactating mothers and 7.95% of non-PLMs were undernourished. Models suggest significant, positive associations between child and maternal anthropometrics; a one-unit increase in WHZ and a 1 cm increase in child MUAC were associated with 0.22 kg/m Undernutrition among non-PLMs illustrates the importance of expanding screening. However, while significant, the strength of association between mother and child anthropometrics does not support child nutritional status as a screening tool for identifying at-risk mothers.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Active screening of only pregnant and lactating mothers (PLMs) excludes other mothers of reproductive age susceptible to undernutrition. Our analysis evaluated if mothers presenting with wasted children were more likely to be undernourished themselves.
METHODS
METHODS
The observational study enrolled mother and child dyads presenting to an outpatient facility in Mogadishu, Somalia, between November 2019 and March 2020. Trained nurses recorded lower extremity oedema for children aged 6-59 months, parity and gestational status for women aged 19-50 years and age, access to care, height/length, mid-upper arm circumference (MUAC) and weight for both. Weight-for-height z-score (WHZ) for children and body mass index (BMI) for mothers were calculated using standard procedures. Wasting was defined as WHZ <-2, MUAC <12.5 cm and/or presence of oedema for children. Undernutrition was defined as MUAC <23 cm for PLMs and BMI <18.5 kg/m
RESULTS
RESULTS
A total of 93.6% (2142/2288) of enrolled dyads met inclusion criteria. Wasting was observed among 57.5% of children; 20.2% of pregnant mothers, 20.0% of lactating mothers and 7.95% of non-PLMs were undernourished. Models suggest significant, positive associations between child and maternal anthropometrics; a one-unit increase in WHZ and a 1 cm increase in child MUAC were associated with 0.22 kg/m
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Undernutrition among non-PLMs illustrates the importance of expanding screening. However, while significant, the strength of association between mother and child anthropometrics does not support child nutritional status as a screening tool for identifying at-risk mothers.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35028519
doi: 10.1136/bmjnph-2021-000302
pii: bmjnph-2021-000302
pmc: PMC8718858
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
501-509Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: None declared.
Références
Food Nutr Bull. 2012 Jun;33(2):169-76
pubmed: 22908699
JAMA Netw Open. 2020 Apr 1;3(4):e203386
pubmed: 32320037
BMJ Open. 2016 Mar 09;6(3):e009854
pubmed: 26962034
Soc Sci Med. 2019 Oct;238:112374
pubmed: 31345611
World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser. 1995;854:1-452
pubmed: 8594834
Public Health Nutr. 2020 Dec;23(17):3104-3113
pubmed: 32799964
PLoS One. 2015 Apr 14;10(4):e0121456
pubmed: 25875397
BMC Nutr. 2019 Mar 1;5:17
pubmed: 32153930
J Glob Health. 2020 Dec;10(2):020423
pubmed: 33110582
Matern Child Nutr. 2020 Apr;16(2):e12902
pubmed: 31833195
Matern Child Nutr. 2020 Apr;16(2):e12920
pubmed: 31773867
Int J Epidemiol. 2011 Feb;40(1):65-101
pubmed: 21097954
J Epidemiol Glob Health. 2018 Dec;8(3-4):134-142
pubmed: 30864754
BMJ Glob Health. 2017 May 29;2(2):e000262
pubmed: 28966793
Lancet. 2008 Feb 2;371(9610):417-40
pubmed: 18206226
BMC Nutr. 2017 Apr 4;3:31
pubmed: 32153813
BMC Pediatr. 2019 Mar 20;19(1):83
pubmed: 30894145
PLoS Curr. 2013 Jun 07;5:
pubmed: 23787989