Benjamin Guesdon

Introduction: The reduced Ready-to-use Therapeutic Food (RUTF) dose strategy was demonstrated effective in recovering children with Severe Acute Malnutrition (SAM) in ideal conditions and in a context of food security. The present study was conducted to provide further evidence on the effectiveness of reduced RUTF dose in a context of high food insecurity and post conflict humanitarian crisis, and with routine health staff. Methods and findings: An individually randomized non-inferiority trial was conducted in 968 children aged 6–59 months suffering from SAM without medical complications in 14 health centers in the Bonzola and Nzaba health zones of Kasaï Oriental, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). Children were randomly assigned to either a control group receiving the standard WHO (World Health Organization) RUTF dose at the time or an intervention group receiving a reduced RUTF dose starting from the third week of treatment. The primary outcome was weight gain velocity from admission to discharge from treatment, while secondary outcomes included anthropometry measurements, programmatic outcomes and relapse. Mixed effects linear and logistic regression models with the health center as random intercept were used to compare differences between the two study groups. Close to 94% of the children were from severely food insecure households. There was no difference in weight gain velocity between the two groups (4.88 ± 2.36 g/kg/d reduced dose group versus 5.09 ± 2.28 g/kg/d standard dose group; difference −0.09 g/kg/d (95% CI [−0.33, 0.15]; p = 0.46). Programmatic outcomes were also similar between the two groups: recovery rate (64.3% versus 67.0%), loss to follow-up (4.69% versus 5.23%), defaulter rate (2.65% and 1.88%), relapse rate over 3 months (2.86% versus 2.40%) and mean length of stay (42 versus 43 days). Nevertheless, the rate of mid-upper arm circumference (MUAC) gain from the third week onwards was lower in the reduced-dose group than in the standard-dose group, with a mean difference of −0.13 mm/week (95% CI [−0.25, −0.01]; p = 0.04). There was no difference in terms of serious adverse events, in the reduced versus standard dose: weight loss (2.24% versus 1.26%), weight stagnation (14.9% versus 17.0%), and medical complications (4.08% versus 3.77%). Important effect modifiers identified were: child sex, child age, season of admission and missed treatment visits. Conclusions: The strategy of a reduced RUTF dose starting from the third week of treatment is as effective as the standard dose strategy on weight gain velocity and programmatic outcomes in a context of severe food insecurity. However, MUAC gain velocity was lower in the reduced dose group. Future studies should investigate the effectiveness of a reduced dose strategy among sub group of children with high risk factors. Trial registration: International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Network (ISRCTN15258669).

Small and nutritionally at‐risk infants aged under 6 months (p = 0.009, and OR = 3.3, 95% CI: 0.8–13.6, p = 0.09, respectively). Boys had higher odds of inpatient mortality than girls (OR = 1.40, 95% CI: 1.02–1.92, p = 0.03). Mortality was only observed in infants p = 0.21 for stunted, wasted and underweight infants z‐score and weight‐for‐age z‐score were found to be useful indicators for programme admission and in‐programme prognosis. Future work needs to explore which better accounts for admission bias. Boys appear to be most at‐risk of dying while receiving malnutrition therapeutic care. Programmes should ensure that all infants receive timely, evidence‐based, effective care.

Objective: We investigated the missed treatment opportunities affecting programs using Mid-Upper Arm Circumference (MUAC) as the sole anthropometric criterion for identification and monitoring of children suffering from Severe Acute Malnutrition (SAM). Design: Alongside MUAC, we assessed Weight-for-Height Z-score (WHZ) in children screened and treated according to the national MUAC only protocol in Pakistan. Besides, we collected parents’ perceptions regarding the treatment received by their children through qualitative interviews. Setting: Data were collected from October to December 2021 in Tando Allah Yar District, Sindh. Subjects: All children screened in the health facilities (n=8818) and all those discharged as recovered (n=686), throughout the district, contributed to the study. All children screened in the community in the catchment areas of five selected health facilities also contributed (n=8459). Parents of 41 children randomly selected from these same facilities participated in the interviews. Results: Overall, 80.3% of the SAM cases identified during community screening and 64.1% of those identified in the health facilities presented a “WHZ-only” diagnosis. These figures reached 93.9% and 84.5% respectively in children aged over 24 months. Among children treated for SAM and discharged as recovered, 25.3% were still severely wasted according to WHZ. While parents positively appraised the treatment received by their children, they also recommended to extend eligibility to other malnourished children in their neighborhood. Conclusion: In this context, using MUAC as the sole anthropometric criterion for treatment decisions (referral, admission and discharge) resulted in a large number of missed opportunities for children in need of timely and adequate care.

Background: Small and nutritionally at-risk infants aged <6 months are at high risk of death, but important evidence gaps exist on how to best identify them. We aimed to determine associations between anthropometric deficits and mortality among infants <6m admitted to inpatient therapeutic care. Methods: A secondary analysis of 2002-2008 data included 5,034 infants aged <6m from 12 countries. The prevalence, concurrence, and severity of wasted, stunted, underweight, and the Composite Index of Anthropometric Failure (CIAF) were analysed. We used logistic regression to examine the association of different anthropometric deficits with in-programme mortality. Results: Among 3,692 infants aged <6m with complete data, 3,539 (95.8%) were underweight, 3,058 (82.8%) were wasted, 2,875 (77.8%) were stunted, and 3,575 (96.8%) had CIAF. Infants with multiple anthropometric deficits were more severely wasted, stunted, and underweight. A total of 141 infants died during inpatient therapeutic care. Among these, severely wasted (116) and severely underweight (138) infants had higher odds of mortality than normal infants (OR=2.1, 95% CI: 1.2-2.7, p=0.009, and OR=3.3, 95% CI: 0.8-13.6, p=0.09, respectively). Boys had higher odds of inpatient mortality than girls (OR=1.40, 95% CI: 1.02-1.92, p=0.03). Conclusion: Multiple anthropometric deficits (CIAF) is common among infants <6m. Future work needs to explore which are the most useful indicator for programme admission and in-programme prognosis: our data supports both WLZ and WAZ, but future work which better accounts for admission bias is urgently needed. Boys appear to be most at-risk. Programmes should ensure that all infants receive timely, evidence-based, effective care.

Background: There is a dearth of evidence on what should be the optimal criteria for discharging children from severe acute malnutrition (SAM) treatment. Programs discharging children while they are still presenting varying levels of weight-for-height (WHZ) or mid-upper-arm circumference (MUAC) deficits, such as those implemented under the current national protocol in Nepal, are opportunities to fill this evidence gap. Methods: We followed a cohort of children discharged as cured from SAM treatment in Parasi district, Nepal. Relapse as SAM, defined as the occurrence of WHZ<-3 or MUAC < 115 mm or nutritional edema, was investigated through repeated home visits, during six months after discharge. We assessed the contribution of remaining anthropometric deficits at discharge to relapse risk through Cox regressions. Results: Relapse as SAM during follow-up was observed in 33 % of the cohort (35/108). Being discharged before reaching the internationally recommended criteria was overall associated with a large increase in the risk of relapse (HR = 3.3; p = 0.006). Among all anthropometric indicators at discharge, WHZ<-2 led to a three-fold increase in relapse risk (HR = 3.2; p = 0.003), while MUAC < 125 mm significantly raised it only in the older children. WHZ<-2 at discharge came up as the only significant predictor of relapse in multivariate analysis (HR = 2.8, p = 0.01), even among children with a MUAC ≥ 125 mm. Of note, more than 80 % of the events of relapse as SAM would have been missed if WHZ had not been monitored and used in the definition of relapse. Conclusions: Our results suggest that the priority for SAM management programs should be to ensure that children reach a high level of WHZ at discharge, at least above or equal to the WHO recommended cut-off. The validity of using a single MUAC cut-off such as 125 mm as a suitable discharge criterion for all age groups is questioned. Further follow-up studies providing a complete assessment of nutritional status at discharge and not based on a restricted MUAC-only definition of relapse as SAM would be urgently needed to set evidence-based discharge criteria. These studies are also required to assess programs currently discounting or omitting WHZ for identification and management of SAM.

Background: One newly proposed approach to determining eligibility of children aged 6–59 months for therapeutic feeding programs (TFPs) is to use mid-upper arm circumference (MUAC) < 115 mm, bilateral oedema or Weight-for-Age Z-score (WAZ) < − 3 as admission criteria (MUAC+SWAZ). We explored potential consequences of this approach on the eligibility for treatment, as compared with the existing WHO normative guidance. We also compared sensitivity and specificity parameters of this approach for detecting wasted children to the previously described “Expanded MUAC” approach. Methods: We analyzed data from 558 population representative cross-sectional cluster surveys conducted since 2007. We retrieved all children classified as severe acute malnutrition (SAM), moderate acute malnutrition (MAM), and those who are both wasted and stunted (WA + ST), and calculated proportions of previously eligible children who would now be excluded from treatment, as well as proportions of non-malnourished children among those who would become eligible. We also analyzed the expected changes in the number and demographics (sex, age) of the selected populations of children according to the different admission approaches. Results: Both MUAC+SWAZ and Expanded MUAC case detection approaches substantially increase the sensitivity in detecting SAM, as compared to an approach which restricts detection of SAM cases to MUAC< 115 mm and oedema. Improved sensitivity however is attained at the expense of specificity and would require a very large increase of the size of TFPs, while still missing a non-negligible proportion (20–25%) of the SAM caseload. While our results confirm the sensitivity of the MUAC+SWAZ case detection approach in detecting WA + ST (over 80%), they show, on the other hand, that about half of the additional target detected by using SWAZ criterion will be neither SAM nor WA + ST. Conclusions: These results suggest that recently promoted approaches to case detection inflate TFPs’ targets through the allocation of treatment to large numbers of children who have not been shown to require this type of support, including a significant proportion of non-acutely malnourished children in the MUAC+SWAZ approach. Considering the scarcity of resources for the implementation of TFPs, the rationale of abandoning the use of WHZ and of these alternative case detection strategies need to be critically reviewed.

Background: Some of the recently piloted innovative approaches for the management of acute malnutrition in children use the “expanded MUAC-only” approach, with Mid Upper Arm Circumference (MUAC) < 125 mm as the sole anthropometric criterion for screening and admission, classification of cases as severe using the 115 mm cut-off, and use Ready-to-Use-Therapeutic-Food (RUTF) for the management of both moderate (MAM) and severe (SAM) cases of acute malnutrition. Our study aimed at exploring the potential consequences of this “expanded MUAC-only” program scenario on the eligibility for treatment and RUTF allocation, as compared with the existing WHO normative guidance. Methods: We analyzed data from 550 population representative cross-sectional cluster surveys conducted since 2007. We retrieved all children classified as SAM and MAM according to currently used case definitions, and calculated the proportions of SAM children who would be excluded from treatment, misclassified as MAM, or whose specific risks (because of having both MUAC and weight-for height deficits) would be ignored. We also analyzed the expected changes in the number and demographics (sex, age) of children meant to receive RUTF according to the new approach. Results: We found that approximately one quarter of SAM children would not be detected and eligible for treatment under the “expanded MUAC-only” scenario, and another 20% would be classified as MAM. A further 17% of the total SAM children would be admitted and followed only according to their MUAC or oedema status, while they also present with a severe weight-for height deficit on admission. Considering MAM targeting, about half of the MAM children would be left undetected. This scenario also shows a 2.5 time increase in the number of children targeted with RUTF, with approximately 70% of MAM and 30% of SAM cases among this new RUTF target. Conclusions: This empirical evidence suggests that adoption of “expanded MUAC-only” programs would likely lead to a priori exclusion from treatment or misclassifying as MAM a large proportion of SAM cases, while redirecting programmatic costs in favor of those less in need. It underscores the need to explore other options for improving the impact of programs addressing the needs of acutely malnourished children.

Background: Some of the recently piloted innovative approaches for the management of acute malnutrition in children use the “expanded MUAC-only” approach, with Mid Upper Arm Circumference (MUAC) <125mm as the sole anthropometric criterion for screening and admission, classification of cases as severe using the 115mm cut-off, and use Ready-to-Use-Therapeutic-Food (RUTF) for the management of both moderate (MAM) and severe (SAM) cases of acute malnutrition. Our study aimed at exploring the potential consequences of this “expanded MUAC-only” program scenario on the eligibility for treatment and RUTF allocation, as compared with the existing WHO normative guidance. Methods: We analyzed data from 550 population representative cross-sectional cluster surveys conducted since 2007. We retrieved all children classified as SAM and MAM according to currently used case definitions, and calculated the proportions of SAM children who would be excluded from treatment, misclassified as MAM, or whose specific risks (because of having both MUAC and weight-for height deficits) would be ignored. We also analyzed the expected changes in the number and demographics (sex, age) of children meant to receive RUTF according to the new approach. Results: We found that approximately one quarter of SAM children would not be detected and eligible for treatment under the “expanded MUAC-only” scenario, and another 20% would be classified as MAM. A further 17% of the total SAM children would be admitted and followed only according to their MUAC or oedema status, while they also present with a severe weight-for height deficit on admission. Considering MAM targeting, about half of the MAM children would be left undetected. This scenario also shows a 2.5 time increase in the number of children targeted with RUTF, with approximately 70% of MAM and 30% of SAM cases among this new RUTF target. Conclusions: This empirical evidence suggests that adoption of “expanded MUAC-only” programs would likely lead to a priori exclusion from treatment or misclassifying as MAM a large proportion of SAM cases, while redirecting programmatic costs in favor of those less in need. It underscores the need to explore other options for improving the impact of programs addressing the needs of acutely malnourished children.

Background Some of the recently piloted innovative approaches for the management of acute malnutrition in children use the “expanded MUAC-only” approach, with Mid Upper Arm Circumference (MUAC) <125mm as the sole anthropometric criterion for screening and admission, classification of cases into moderate or severe using the 115mm cut-off, and use Ready-to-Use-Therapeutic-Food (RUTF) for the management of both moderate (MAM) and severe (SAM) cases of acute malnutrition. Our study aimed at exploring the potential impact of this “expanded MUAC-only” program scenario on the eligibility for treatment and RUTF allocation, as compared with the existing WHO normative guidance.Methods We analyzed data from 550 population representative cross-sectional cluster surveys conducted since 2007. We retrieved all children classified as SAM and MAM according to currently used case definitions, and calculated the proportions of SAM children who would be excluded from treatment, misclassified as MAM, or whose specific risks (because of having both MUAC and weight-for height deficits) would be ignored. We also analyzed the expected changes in the number and profile of children meant to receive RUTF according to the new approach.Results We found that approximately one quarter of SAM children would not be detected and eligible for treatment under the “expanded MUAC-only” scenario, and another 20% would be classified as MAM. A further 17% of the total SAM children would be admitted and followed only according to their MUAC or oedema status, while they also present with a severe weight-for height deficit on admission. Considering MAM targeting, about half of the MAM children would be left undetected. This scenario also shows a 2.5 time increase in the number of children targeted with RUTF, with approximately 70% of MAM and 30% of SAM cases among this new RUTF target.Conclusions This empirical evidence suggests that adoption of “expanded MUAC-only” programs would likely lead to a priori exclusion from treatment or misclassifying as MAM a large proportion of SAM cases, while redirecting programmatic costs in favor of those less in need. It underscores the need to explore other options for improving the impact of programs addressing the needs of acutely malnourished children.