• Mark E Ralston and Mark A Myatt.
• Department of Pediatrics, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland, United States of America.
• Plos One. 2016 Jan 1; 11 (8): e0159260.

ImportanceA simple, reliable anthropometric tool for rapid estimation of weight in children would be useful in limited-resource settings where current weight estimation tools are not uniformly reliable, nearly all global under-five mortality occurs, severe acute malnutrition is a significant contributor in approximately one-third of under-five mortality, and a weight scale may not be immediately available in emergencies to first-response providers.ObjectiveTo determine the accuracy and precision of mid-upper arm circumference (MUAC) and height as weight estimation tools in children under five years of age in low-to-middle income countries.DesignThis was a retrospective observational study. Data were collected in 560 nutritional surveys during 1992-2006 using a modified Expanded Program of Immunization two-stage cluster sample design.SettingLocations with high prevalence of acute and chronic malnutrition.ParticipantsA total of 453,990 children met inclusion criteria (age 6-59 months; weight ≤ 25 kg; MUAC 80-200 mm) and exclusion criteria (bilateral pitting edema; biologically implausible weight-for-height z-score (WHZ), weight-for-age z-score (WAZ), and height-for-age z-score (HAZ) values).ExposuresWeight was estimated using Broselow Tape, Hong Kong formula, and database MUAC alone, height alone, and height and MUAC combined.Main Outcomes And MeasuresMean percentage difference between true and estimated weight, proportion of estimates accurate to within ± 25% and ± 10% of true weight, weighted Kappa statistic, and Bland-Altman bias were reported as measures of tool accuracy. Standard deviation of mean percentage difference and Bland-Altman 95% limits of agreement were reported as measures of tool precision.ResultsDatabase height was a more accurate and precise predictor of weight compared to Broselow Tape 2007 [B], Broselow Tape 2011 [A], and MUAC. Mean percentage difference between true and estimated weight was +0.49% (SD = 10.33%); proportion of estimates accurate to within ± 25% of true weight was 97.36% (95% CI 97.40%, 97.46%); and Bland-Altman bias and 95% limits of agreement were 0.05 kg and (-2.15 kg; 2.24 kg). The height model fitted for MUAC classes was accurate and precise. For MUAC < 115 mm, the proportion of estimates accurate to within ± 25% of true weight was 97.15% (95% CI 96.90%, 97.42%) and the Bland-Altman bias and 95% limits of agreement were 0.08 kg and (-1.21 kg; 1.37 kg). For MUAC between 115 and 125 mm, the proportion of estimates accurate to within ± 25% of true weight was 98.93% (95% CI 98.82%, 99.03%) and Bland-Altman bias and 95% limits of agreement were 0.05 kg and (-1.15 kg; 1.24 kg). For MUAC > 125 mm, the proportion of estimates accurate to within ± 25% of true weight was 98.33% (95% CI 98.29%, 98.37%) and Bland-Altman bias and 95% limits of agreement were 0.05 kg and (-2.08 kg; 2.19 kg).Conclusions And RelevanceModels estimating weight from height alone and height with MUAC class in children aged 6-59 months in a database from low-to-middle income countries were more accurate and precise than previous weight estimation tools. A height-based weight estimation tape stratified according to MUAC classes is proposed for children aged 6-59 months in limited-resource settings.

14 keywords...

hide…