Improving estimates of the burden of severe wasting: analysis of secondary prevalence and incidence data from 352 sites.

INTRODUCTION: Estimates of incident cases of severe wasting among young children are not available for most settings but are needed for optimal planning of treatment programmes and burden estimation. To improve programme planning, global guidance recommends a single 'incidence correction factor' of 1.6 be applied to available prevalence estimates to account for incident cases. This study aimed to update estimates of the incidence correction factor to improve programme planning and inform the approach to burden estimation for severe wasting. METHODS: A global call was issued for secondary data from severe wasting treatment programmes including prevalence, population size, programme admission and programme coverage through a UNICEF-led effort. Site-specific incidence correction factors were calculated as the number of incident cases (annual programme admissions/programme coverage) divided by the number of prevalent cases (prevalence*population size). Estimates were aggregated by country, region and overall using inverse-variance weighted random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: We estimated incidence correction factors from 352 sites in 20 countries. Estimates aggregated by country ranged from 1.3 (Nigeria) to 30.1 (Burundi). Excluding implausible values, the overall incidence correction factor was 3.6 (95% CI 3.4 to 3.9). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that incidence correction factors vary between sites and that the burden of severe wasting will often be underestimated using the currently recommended incidence correction factor of 1.6. Application of updated incidence correction factors represents a simple way to improve programme planning when incidence data are not available and could inform the approach to burden estimation.

Relapse and post-discharge body composition of children treated for acute malnutrition using a simplified, combined protocol: A nested cohort from the ComPAS RCT.

INTRODUCTION: Severe and moderate acute malnutrition (SAM and MAM) affect more than 50 million children worldwide yet 80% of these children do not access care. The Combined Protocol for Acute Malnutrition Study (ComPAS) trial assessed the effectiveness of a simplified, combined SAM/MAM protocol for children aged 6-59 months and found non-inferior recovery compared to standard care. To further inform policy, this study assessed post-discharge outcomes of children treated with this novel protocol in Kenya. METHODS: Six 'combined' protocol clinics treated SAM and MAM children using an optimised mid-upper arm circumference (MUAC)-based dose of ready-to-use therapeutic food (RUTF). Six 'standard care' clinics treated SAM with weight-based RUTF rations; MAM with ready-to-use supplementary food (RUSF). Four months post-discharge, we assessed anthropometry, recent history of illness, and body composition by bioelectrical impedance analysis. Data was analysed using multivariable linear regression, adjusted for age, sex and allowing for clustering by clinic. RESULTS: We sampled 850 children (median age 18 months, IQR 15-23); 44% of the original trial sample in Kenya. Children treated with the combined protocol had similar anthropometry, fat-free mass, fat mass, skinfold thickness z-scores, and frequency of common illnesses 4 months post-discharge compared the standard protocol. Mean subscapular skinfold z-scores were close to the global norm (standard care: 0.24; combined 0.27). There was no significant difference in odds of relapse between protocols (SAM, 3% vs 3%, OR = 1.0 p = 0.75; MAM, 10% vs 12%, OR = 0.90 p = 0.34). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the lower dosage of RUTF for most SAM children in the combined protocol, their anthropometry and relapse rates at 4 months post-discharge were similar to standard care. MAM children treated with RUTF had similar body composition to those treated with RUSF and neither group exhibited excess adiposity. These results add further evidence that a combined protocol is as effective as standard care with no evidence of adverse effects post-discharge. A simplified, combined approach could treat more children, stretch existing resources further, and contribute to achieving Sustainable Development Goal Two.

Relapse and regression to severe wasting in children under 5 years: A theoretical framework.

Systematic reviews have highlighted that repeated severe wasting after receiving treatment is likely to be common, but standardised measurement is needed urgently. The Council of Research & Technical Advice for Acute Malnutrition (CORTASAM) released recommendations on standard measurement of relapse (wasting within 6 months after exiting treatment as per recommended discharge criteria), regression (wasting within 6 months after exiting treatment before reaching recommended discharge criteria) and reoccurrence (wasting after 6 months of exit from treatment as per recommended discharge criteria). We provide a theoretical framework of post-treatment relapse and regression to severe wasting to guide discussions, risk factor analyses, and development and evaluations of interventions. This framework highlights that there are factors that may impact risk of relapse and regression in addition to the impact of contextual factors associated with incidence and reoccurrence of severe wasting more generally. Factors hypothesised to be associated with relapse and regression relate specifically to the nutrition and health status of the child on admission to, during and exit from treatment and treatment interventions, platforms and approaches as well as type of exit from treatment (e.g., before reaching recommended criteria). These factors influence whether children reach full recovery, and poorer nutritional and immunological status at exit from treatment are more proximate determinants of risk of severe wasting after treatment, although post-treatment interventions may modify risks. The evidence base for many of these factors is weak. Our framework can guide research to improve our understanding of risks of relapse and regression and how to prevent them and inform programmes on what data to collect to evaluate relapse. Implementation research is needed to operationalise results in programmes and reduce post-treatment severe wasting at scale.

Prevention of child wasting: Results of a Child Health & Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) prioritisation exercise.

BACKGROUND: An estimated 49.5 million children under five years of age are wasted. There is a lack of robust studies on effective interventions to prevent wasting. The aim of this study was to identify and prioritise the main outstanding research questions in relation to wasting prevention to inform future research agendas. METHOD: A research prioritisation exercise was conducted following the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative method. Identified research gaps were compiled from multiple sources, categorised into themes and streamlined into forty research questions by an expert group. A survey was then widely circulated to assess research questions according to four criteria. An overall research priority score was calculated to rank questions. FINDINGS: The prioritised questions have a strong focus on interventions. The importance of the early stages of life in determining later experiences of wasting was highlighted. Other important themes included the identification of at-risk infants and young children early in the progression of wasting and the roles of existing interventions and the health system in prevention. DISCUSSION: These results indicate consensus to support more research on the pathways to wasting encompassing the in-utero environment, on the early period of infancy and on the process of wasting and its early identification. They also reinforce how little is known about impactful interventions for the prevention of wasting. CONCLUSION: This exercise provides a five-year investment case for research that could most effectively improve on-the-ground programmes to prevent child wasting and inform supportive policy change.

Relapse after severe acute malnutrition: A systematic literature review and secondary data analysis.

The objectives of most treatment programs for severe acute malnutrition (SAM) in children focus on initial recovery only, leaving post-discharge outcomes, such as relapse, poorly understood and undefined. This study aimed to systematically review current literature and conduct secondary data analyses of studies that captured relapse rates, up to 18-month post-discharge, in children following recovery from SAM treatment. The literature search (including PubMed and Google Scholar) built upon two recent reviews to identify a variety of up-to-date published studies and grey literature. This search yielded 26 articles and programme reports that provided information on relapse. The proportion of children who relapsed after SAM treatment varied greatly from 0% to 37% across varying lengths of time following discharge. The lack of a standard definition of relapse limited comparability even among the few studies that have quantified post-discharge relapse. Inconsistent treatment protocols and poor adherence to protocols likely add to the wide range of relapse reported. Secondary analysis of a database from Malawi found no significant association between potential individual risk factors at admission and discharge, except being an orphan, which resulted in five times greater odds of relapse at 6 months post-discharge (95% CI [1.7, 12.4], P = 0.003). The development of a standard definition of relapse is needed for programme implementers and researchers. This will allow for assessment of programme quality regarding sustained recovery and better understanding of the contribution of relapse to local and global burden of SAM.

Use of Mid-Upper Arm Circumference by Novel Community Platforms to Detect, Diagnose, and Treat Severe Acute Malnutrition in Children: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: A stubborn persistence of child severe acute malnutrition (SAM) and continued gaps in program coverage have made identifying methods for expanding detection, diagnosis, and treatment of SAM an urgent public health need. There is growing consensus that making mid-upper arm circumference (MUAC) use more widely accessible among caregivers and community health workers (CHWs) is an important next step in further decentralizing SAM care and increasing program coverage, including the ability of CHWs to treat uncomplicated SAM in community settings. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review to summarize published and operational evidence published since 2000 describing the use of MUAC for detection and diagnosis of SAM in children aged 6-59 months by caregivers and CHWs, and of management of uncomplicated SAM by CHWs, all outside of formal health care settings. We screened 1,072 records, selected 43 records for full-text screening, and identified 22 studies that met our eligibility criteria. We extracted data on a number of items, including study design, strengths, and weaknesses; intervention and control; and key findings and operational lessons. We then synthesized the qualitative findings to inform our conclusions. The issue of treating children classified as SAM based on low weight-for-height, rather than MUAC, at household level, is not addressed in this review. FINDINGS: We found evidence that caregivers are able to use MUAC to detect SAM in their children with minimal risk and many potential benefits to early case detection and coverage. We also found evidence that CHWs are able to correctly use MUAC for SAM detection and diagnosis and to provide a high quality of care in the treatment of uncomplicated SAM when training, supervision, and motivation are adequate. However, the number of published research studies was small, their geographic scope was narrow, and most described intensive, small-scale interventions; thus, findings are not currently generalizable to public-sector health care systems. CONCLUSIONS: Scaling up the use of MUAC by caregivers and CHWs to detect SAM in household and community settings is a promising step toward improving the coverage of SAM detection, diagnosis, and treatment. Further research on scalability, applicability across a wider range of contexts, coverage impact, and cost is needed. The primary use of MUAC for SAM detection should also be explored where appropriate.

The "ComPAS Trial" combined treatment model for acute malnutrition: study protocol for the economic evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Acute malnutrition is currently divided into severe (SAM) and moderate (MAM) based on level of wasting. SAM and MAM currently have separate treatment protocols and products, managed by separate international agencies. For SAM, the dose of treatment is allocated by the child's weight. A combined and simplified protocol for SAM and MAM, with a standardised dose of ready-to-use therapeutic food (RUTF), is being trialled for non-inferior recovery rates and may be more cost-effective than the current standard protocols for treating SAM and MAM. METHOD: This is the protocol for the economic evaluation of the ComPAS trial, a cluster-randomised controlled, non-inferiority trial that compares a novel combined protocol for treating uncomplicated acute malnutrition compared to the current standard protocol in South Sudan and Kenya. We will calculate the total economic costs of both protocols from a societal perspective, using accounting data, interviews and survey questionnaires. The incremental cost of implementing the combined protocol will be estimated, and all costs and outcomes will be presented as a cost-consequence analysis. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio will be calculated for primary and secondary outcome, if statistically significant. DISCUSSION: We hypothesise that implementing the combined protocol will be cost-effective due to streamlined logistics at clinic level, reduced length of treatment, especially for MAM, and reduced dosages of RUTF. The findings of this economic evaluation will be important for policymakers, especially given the hypothesised non-inferiority of the main health outcomes. The publication of this protocol aims to improve rigour of conduct and transparency of data collection and analysis. It is also intended to promote inclusion of economic evaluation in other nutrition intervention studies, especially for MAM, and improve comparability with other studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 30393230 , date: 16/03/2017.