• Cochrane Db Syst Rev · Jun 2013

    Review Meta Analysis

    Ready-to-use therapeutic food for home-based treatment of severe acute malnutrition in children from six months to five years of age.

    • Anel Schoonees, Martani Lombard, Alfred Musekiwa, Etienne Nel, and Jimmy Volmink.
    • Centre for Evidence-based Health Care, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa.
    • Cochrane Db Syst Rev. 2013 Jun 6; 2013 (6): CD009000CD009000.

    BackgroundMalnourished children have a higher risk of death and illness. Treating severe acute malnourished children in hospitals is not always desirable or practical in rural settings, and home treatment may be better. Home treatment can be food prepared by the carer, such as flour porridge, or commercially manufactured food such as ready-to-use therapeutic food (RUTF). RUTF is made according to a standard, energy-rich composition defined by the World Health Organization (WHO). The benefits of RUTF include a low moisture content, long shelf life without needing refrigeration and that it requires no preparation.ObjectivesTo assess the effects of home-based RUTF on recovery, relapse and mortality in children with severe acute malnutrition.Search MethodsWe searched the following electronic databases up to April 2013: Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-process, EMBASE, CINAHL, Science Citation Index, African Index Medicus, LILACS, ZETOC and three trials registers. We also contacted researchers and clinicians in the field and handsearched bibliographies of included studies and relevant reviews.Selection CriteriaWe included randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials where children between six months and five years of age with severe acute malnutrition were treated at home with RUTF compared to a standard diet, or different regimens and formulations of RUTFs compared to each other. We assessed recovery, relapse and mortality as primary outcomes, and anthropometrical changes, time to recovery and adverse outcomes as secondary outcomes.Data Collection And AnalysisTwo review authors independently assessed trial eligibility using prespecified criteria, and three review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial risk of bias.Main ResultsWe included four trials (three having a high risk of bias), all conducted in Malawi with the same contact author. One small trial included children infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). We found the risk of bias to be high for the three quasi-randomised trials while the fourth trial had a low to moderate risk of bias. Because of the sparse data for HIV, we reported below the main results for all children together. RUTF meeting total daily requirements versus standard dietWhen comparing RUTF with standard diet (flour porridge), we found three quasi-randomised cluster trials (n = 599). RUTF may improve recovery slightly (risk ratio (RR) 1.32; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.16 to 1.50; low quality evidence), but we do not know whether RUTF improves relapse, mortality or weight gain (very low quality evidence). RUTF supplement versus RUTF meeting total daily requirementsWhen comparing RUTF supplement with RUTF that meets total daily nutritional requirements, we found two quasi-randomised cluster trials (n = 210). For recovery, relapse, mortality and weight gain the quality of evidence was very low; therefore, the effects of RUTF are unknown. RUTF containing less milk powder versus standard RUTFWhen comparing a cheaper RUTF containing less milk powder (10%) versus standard RUTF (25% milk powder), we found one trial that randomised 1874 children. For recovery, there was probably little or no difference between the groups (RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.01; moderate quality evidence). RUTF containing less milk powder may lead to slightly more children relapsing (RR 1.33; 95% CI 1.03 to 1.72; low quality evidence) and to less weight gain (mean difference (MD) -0.5 g/kg/day; 95% CI -0.75 to -0.25; low-quality evidence) than standard RUTF. We do not know whether the cheaper RUTF improved mortality (very low quality evidence).Authors' ConclusionsGiven the limited evidence base currently available, it is not possible to reach definitive conclusions regarding differences in clinical outcomes in children with severe acute malnutrition who were given home-based ready-to-use therapeutic food (RUTF) compared to the standard diet, or who were treated with RUTF in different daily amounts or formulations. For this reason, either RUTF or flour porridge can be used to treat children at home depending on availability, affordability and practicality. Well-designed, adequately powered pragmatic randomised controlled trials of HIV-uninfected and HIV-infected children with severe acute malnutrition are needed.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…