A simplified, combined protocol versus standard treatment for acute malnutrition in children 6-59 months (ComPAS trial): A cluster-randomized controlled non-inferiority trial in Kenya and South Sudan.

BACKGROUND: Malnutrition underlies 3 million child deaths worldwide. Current treatments differentiate severe acute malnutrition (SAM) from moderate acute malnutrition (MAM) with different products and programs. This differentiation is complex and costly. The Combined Protocol for Acute Malnutrition Study (ComPAS) assessed the effectiveness of a simplified, unified SAM/MAM protocol for children aged 6-59 months. Eliminating the need for separate products and protocols could improve the impact of programs by treating children more easily and cost-effectively, reaching more children globally. METHODS AND FINDINGS: A cluster-randomized non-inferiority trial compared a combined protocol against standard care in Kenya and South Sudan. Randomization was stratified by country. Combined protocol clinics treated children using 2 sachets of ready-to-use therapeutic food (RUTF) per day for those with mid-upper arm circumference (MUAC) < 11.5 cm and/or edema, and 1 sachet of RUTF per day for those with MUAC 11.5 to <12.5 cm. Standard care clinics treated SAM with weight-based RUTF rations, and MAM with ready-to-use supplementary food (RUSF). The primary outcome was nutritional recovery. Secondary outcomes included cost-effectiveness, coverage, defaulting, death, length of stay, and average daily weight and MUAC gains. Main analyses were per-protocol, with intention-to-treat analyses also conducted. The non-inferiority margin was 10%. From 8 May 2017 to 31 March 2018, 2,071 children were enrolled in 12 combined protocol clinics (mean age 17.4 months, 41% male), and 2,039 in 12 standard care clinics (mean age 16.7 months, 41% male). In total, 1,286 (62.1%) and 1,202 (59.0%), respectively, completed treatment; 981 (76.3%) on the combined protocol and 884 (73.5%) on the standard protocol recovered, yielding a risk difference of 0.03 (95% CI -0.05 to 0.10, p = 0.52; per-protocol analysis, adjusted for country, age, and sex). The amount of ready-to-use food (RUTF or RUSF) required for a child with SAM to reach full recovery was less in the combined protocol (122 versus 193 sachets), and the combined protocol cost US$123 less per child recovered (US$918 versus US$1,041). There were 23 (1.8%) deaths in the combined protocol arm and 21 (1.8%) deaths in the standard protocol arm (adjusted risk difference 95% CI -0.01 to 0.01, p = 0.87). There was no evidence of a difference between the protocols for any of the other secondary outcomes. Study limitations included contextual factors leading to defaulting, a combined multi-country power estimate, and operational constraints. CONCLUSIONS: Combined treatment for SAM and MAM is non-inferior to standard care. Further research should focus on operational implications, cost-effectiveness, and context (Asia versus Africa; emergency versus food-secure settings). This trial is complete and registered at ISRCTN (ISRCTN30393230). TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered at ISRCTN, trial number ISRCTN30393230.

Evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of the treatment of uncomplicated severe acute malnutrition by lady health workers as compared to an outpatient therapeutic feeding programme in Sindh Province, Pakistan.

BACKGROUND: Due to the limited evidence of the cost-effectiveness of Community Health Workers (CHW) delivering treatment for severe acute malnutrition (SAM), there is a need to better understand the costs incurred by both implementing institutions and beneficiary households. This study assessed the costs and cost-effectiveness of treatment for cases of SAM without complications delivered by government-employed Lady Health Workers (LHWs) and complemented with non-governmental organisation (NGO) delivered outpatient facility-based care compared with NGO delivered outpatient facility-based care only alongside a two-arm randomised controlled trial conducted in Sindh Province, Pakistan. METHODS: An activity-based cost model was used, employing a societal perspective to include costs incurred by beneficiaries and the wider community. Costs were estimated through accounting records, interviews and informal group discussions. Cost-effectiveness was assessed for each arm relative to no intervention, and incrementally between the two interventions, providing information on both absolute and relative costs and effects. RESULTS: The cost per child recovered in outpatient facility-based care was similar to LHW-delivered care, at 363 USD and 382 USD respectively. An additional 146 USD was spent per additional child recovered by outpatient facilities compared to LHWs. Results of sensitivity analyses indicated considerable uncertainty in which strategy was most cost-effective due to small differences in cost and recovery rates between arms. The cost to the beneficiary household of outpatient facility-based care was double that of LHW-delivered care. CONCLUSIONS: Outpatient facility-based care was found to be slightly more cost-effective compared to LHW-delivered care, despite the potential for cost-effectiveness of CHWs managing SAM being demonstrated in other settings. The similarity of cost-effectiveness outcomes between the two models resulted in uncertainty as to which strategy was the most cost-effective. Similarity of costs and effectiveness between models suggests that whether it is appropriate to engage LHWs in substituting or complementing outpatient facilities may depend on population needs, including coverage and accessibility of existing services, rather than be purely a consideration of cost. Future research should assess the cost-effectiveness of LHW-delivered care when delivered solely by the government. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03043352 , ClinicalTrials.gov. Retrospectively registered.

[Effectiveness and cost of management of severe acute malnutrition with complications in Kaya, Burkina Faso]. / Performance et coût de la prise en charge de la malnutrition aiguë sévère avec complications à Kaya, Burkina Faso.

INTRODUCTION: The consequences of severe acute malnutrition are measured in terms of health and survival, but also of cognitive development, its productivity and the overall national economy. Its management requires enormous financial resources. The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of treating severe acute malnutrition versus cost of treatment of severe acute malnutrition in children. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of 199 children aged 0-59 months admitted to the Centre for Nutritional Recovery and Education in Kaya, Burkina Faso, from January to December 2014. The cost of treatment, the length of stay in the Centre for Nutritional Recovery and Education, daily weight gain and the speed of recovery were analyzed based on the standards calculation methods. Mann-Whitney test and Kruskall-Wallis test were used to compare the medians (0.05 threshold). RESULTS: As expected, children aged 6-23 months were the most affected (51.8%) and acute respiratory infections were the most associated diseases (57.9%). The median length of stay in the Centre for Nutritional Recovery and Education was 9.0 (7.0-13.0) days, the mean speed of recovery was 100.0 (65.8 - 143.3) g/day and the average daily weight gain was 18.1 (11.6 - 27.7) g/kg/day. The average cost of treatment in a malnourished child is estimated to be 15 715,3 FCFA (25.2 USD). CONCLUSION: The cost of treatment is hardly affordable by the parents of malnourished children; hence the necessity for government and development partners interventions.

Cost-effectiveness of the treatment of uncomplicated severe acute malnutrition by community health workers compared to treatment provided at an outpatient facility in rural Mali.

BACKGROUND: The Malian Nutrition Division of the Ministry of Health and Action Against Hunger tested the feasibility of integrating treatment of severe acute malnutrition (SAM) into the existing Integrated Community Case Management package delivered by community health workers (CHWs). This study assessed costs and cost-effectiveness of CHW-delivered care compared to outpatient facility-based care. METHODS: Activity-based costing methods were used, and a societal perspective employed to include all relevant costs incurred by institutions, beneficiaries and communities. The intervention and control arm enrolled different numbers of children so a modelled scenario sensitivity analysis was conducted to assess the cost-effectiveness of the two arms, assuming equal numbers of children enrolled. RESULTS: In the base case, with unequal numbers of children in each arm, for CHW-delivered care, the cost per child treated was 244 USD and cost per child recovered was 259 USD. Outpatient facility-based care was less cost-effective at 442 USD per child and 501 USD per child recovered. The conclusions of the analysis changed in the modelled scenario sensitivity analysis, with outpatient facility-based care being marginally more cost-effective (cost per child treated is 188 USD, cost per child recovered is 214 USD), compared to CHW-delivered care. This suggests that achieving good coverage is a key factor influencing cost-effectiveness of CHWs delivering treatment for SAM in this setting. Per week of treatment, households receiving CHW-delivered care spent half of the time receiving treatment and three times less money compared with those receiving treatment from the outpatient facility. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports existing evidence that the delivery of treatment by CHWs is a cost-effective intervention, provided that good coverage is achieved. A major benefit of this strategy was the lower cost incurred by the beneficiary household when treatment is available in the community. Further research is needed on the implementation costs that would be incurred by the government to increase the operability of these results.

Effects of unconditional cash transfers on the outcome of treatment for severe acute malnutrition (SAM): a cluster-randomised trial in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

BACKGROUND: Cash transfer programs (CTPs) aim to strengthen financial security for vulnerable households. This potentially enables improvements in diet, hygiene, health service access and investment in food production or income generation. The effect of CTPs on the outcome of children already severely malnourished is not well delineated. The objective of this study was to test whether CTPs will improve the outcome of children treated for severe acute malnutrition (SAM) in the Democratic Republic of the Congo over 6 months. METHODS: We conducted a cluster-randomised controlled trial in children with uncomplicated SAM who received treatment according to the national protocol and counselling with or without a cash supplement of US$40 monthly for 6 months. Analyses were by intention to treat. RESULTS: The hazard ratio of reaching full recovery from SAM was 35% higher in the intervention group than the control group (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.10 to 1.69, P = 0.007). The adjusted hazard ratios in the intervention group for relapse to moderate acute malnutrition (MAM) and SAM were 0.21 (95% CI = 0.11 to 0.41, P = 0.001) and 0.30 (95% CI = 0.16 to 0.58, P = 0.001) respectively. Non-response and defaulting were lower when the households received cash. All the nutritional outcomes in the intervention group were significantly better than those in the control group. After 6 months, 80% of cash-intervened children had re-gained their mid-upper arm circumference measurements and weight-for-height/length Z-scores and showed evidence of catch-up. Less than 40% of the control group had a fully successful outcome, with many deteriorating after discharge. There was a significant increase in diet diversity and food consumption scores for both groups from baseline; the increase was significantly greater in the intervention group than the control group. CONCLUSIONS: CTPs can increase recovery from SAM and decrease default, non-response and relapse rates during and following treatment. Household developmental support is critical in food insecure areas to maximise the efficiency of SAM treatment programs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02460848 . Registered on 27 May 2015.

Cost analysis of the treatment of severe acute malnutrition in West Africa.

We present an updated cost analysis to provide new estimates of the cost of providing community-based treatment for severe acute malnutrition, including expenditure shares for major cost categories. We calculated total and per child costs from a provider perspective. We categorized costs into three main activities (outpatient treatment, inpatient treatment, and management/administration) and four cost categories within each activity (personnel; therapeutic food; medical supplies; and infrastructure and logistical support). For each category, total costs were calculated by multiplying input quantities expended in the Médecins Sans Frontières nutrition program in Niger during a 12-month study period by 2015 input prices. All children received outpatient treatment, with 43% also receiving inpatient treatment. In this large, well-established program, the average cost per child treated was €148.86, with outpatient and inpatient treatment costs of €75.50 and €134.57 per child, respectively. Therapeutic food (44%, €32.98 per child) and personnel (35%, €26.70 per child) dominated outpatient costs, while personnel (56%, €75.47 per child) dominated in the cost of inpatient care. Sensitivity analyses suggested lowering prices of medical treatments, and therapeutic food had limited effect on total costs per child, while increasing program size and decreasing use of expatriate staff support reduced total costs per child substantially. Updated estimates of severe acute malnutrition treatment cost are substantially lower than previously published values, and important cost savings may be possible with increases in coverage/program size and integration into national health programs. These updated estimates can be used to suggest approaches to improve efficiency and inform national-level resource allocation.

Food insecurity and malnutrition in Chinese elementary school students.

It has been shown that food insecurity is associated with poor diet quality and unfavourable health outcomes. However, little is known about the potential effects of food insecurity on the overall malnutrition status among children. In this study, we investigated the prevalence of food insecurity among 1583 elementary school students, aged 6-14 years, living in Chinese rural areas and examined its association with four malnutrition signs, including rickets sequelae, anaemia, stunting and wasting. Information on food security was collected via questionnaires. Rickets sequelae were assessed by an experienced paediatrician during the interview. Anaemia was determined by the WHO Hb thresholds adjusted by the local altitude. Weight and height were measured during the interview. Stunting and wasting were then evaluated according to WHO child growth standards (2007). We examined the association between food insecurity and the number of malnutrition signs (total number = 4), and the likelihood of having severe malnutrition (presence of 3+ signs), after adjusting for potential confounders, such as age, social-economic status and dietary intakes. During the previous 12 months, the overall prevalence of food insecurity was 6.1% in the entire studied population and 16.3% in participants with severe malnutrition. Participants with food insecurity had a slightly higher number of malnutrition signs (1.14 v. 0.96; P=0.043) relative to those who were food secure, after adjusting for potential confounders. Food insecurity was also associated with increased likelihood of having severe malnutrition (adjusted OR 3.08; 95% CI 1.47, 6.46; P=0.003). In conclusion, food insecurity is significantly associated with malnutrition among Chinese children in this community.