Effects of prenatal small-quantity lipid-based nutrient supplements on pregnancy, birth and infant outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data from randomized controlled trials in low- and middle-income countries.

BACKGROUND: Undernutrition during pregnancy increases the risk of giving birth to a small vulnerable newborn. Small-quantity lipid-based nutrient supplements (SQ-LNS) contain both macro- and micronutrients and can help prevent multiple nutritional deficiencies. OBJECTIVES: We examined effects of SQ-LNS provided during pregnancy, compared to a) iron and folic acid or standard of care (IFA/SOC) or b) multiple micronutrient supplements (MMS), and identified characteristics that modified the estimates of effects of SQ-LNS on birth outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a 2-stage meta-analysis of individual participant data from 4 randomized controlled trials of SQ-LNS provided during pregnancy (n = 5,273). We generated study-specific and subgroup estimates of SQ-LNS compared with IFA/SOC or MMS and pooled the estimates. In sensitivity analyses, we examined whether results differed depending on methods for gestational age dating, birth anthropometry, or study design. RESULTS: SQ-LNS (vs IFA/SOC) increased birth weight (mean difference: +49g; 95% CI: 26, 71g) and all birth anthropometric z-scores (+0.10-0.13 SD); it reduced risk of low birthweight by 11%, newborn stunting by 17%, newborn wasting by 11%, and small head size by 15%. Only 2 trials compared SQ-LNS and MMS; p-values for birth outcomes were >0.10 except for head circumference (e.g., z-score for gestational age +0.11; 95% CI: -0.01, 0.23). Effect estimates for SQ-LNS vs IFA/SOC were greater among female infants and, for certain outcomes, among mothers with body mass index < 20 kg/m2, inflammation, malaria, or household food insecurity. Effect estimates for SQ-LNS vs MMS were greater for certain outcomes among female infants, first-born infants, and mothers < 25 y. CONCLUSIONS: SQ-LNS had positive impacts on multiple outcomes compared to IFA/SOC, but further research directly comparing SQ-LNS and MMS is needed. Targeting SQ-LNS to vulnerable subgroups may be worth considering. Analysis registered at www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO (CRD42021283391). REGISTRY AND REGISTRY NUMBER FOR SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS OR META-ANALYSES: Registered at www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO as CRD42021283391 on 11 April 2021.

The Cost and Cost-Effectiveness of an Integrated Wasting Prevention and Screening Intervention Package in Burkina Faso and Mali.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about costs and cost effectiveness of interventions that integrate wasting prevention into screening for child wasting. OBJECTIVES: This study's objective was to estimate the cost and cost-effectiveness of an intervention that integrated behavior change communication (BCC) and small-quantity lipid-based nutrient supplements (SQ-LNS) into platforms for wasting screening in Burkina Faso (a facility-based platform, where BCC was enhanced compared with standard care) and Mali (a community-based platform, with standard BCC). METHODS: Activity-based costing was used to estimate the cost per child-contact for the intervention and the comparison group, which did not receive the intervention. Costs were ascertained from accounting records, interviews, surveys, and observations. The number of child-contacts was calculated using population size estimates and average attendance rates for each service. Costs per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) averted were estimated using a Markov model populated with data from the parent trials on impact of wasting incidence and treatment coverage. RESULTS: In the intervention group in Burkina Faso, the cost per child-contact of facility-based screening was $0.85 of enhanced BCC was $4.28, and of SQ-LNS was $8.86. In Mali, the cost per child-contact of community-based screening was $0.57, standard BCC was $0.72, and SQ-LNS was $4.14. Although no SQ-LNS costs were incurred in the comparison groups (hence lower total costs), costs per child-contact for screening and BCC were higher because coverage of these services was lower. The intervention package cost $1073 per DALY averted in Burkina Faso and $747 in Mali. CONCLUSIONS: Integration of wasting prevention into screening for child wasting led to higher total costs but lower unit costs than standard screening due to increased coverage. Greater cost-effectiveness could be achieved if BCC were strengthened and led to improved caregiver health and nutrition practices and if screening triggered appropriate use of services and higher treatment coverage.

Neonatal mortality risk of vulnerable newborns by fine stratum of gestational age and birthweight for 230 679 live births in nine low- and middle-income countries, 2000-2017.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the mortality risks by fine strata of gestational age and birthweight among 230 679 live births in nine low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) from 2000 to 2017. DESIGN: Descriptive multi-country secondary data analysis. SETTING: Nine LMICs in sub-Saharan Africa, Southern and Eastern Asia, and Latin America. POPULATION: Liveborn infants from 15 population-based cohorts. METHODS: Subnational, population-based studies with high-quality birth outcome data were invited to join the Vulnerable Newborn Measurement Collaboration. All studies included birthweight, gestational age measured by ultrasound or last menstrual period, infant sex and neonatal survival. We defined adequate birthweight as 2500-3999 g (reference category), macrosomia as ≥4000 g, moderate low as 1500-2499 g and very low birthweight as <1500 g. We analysed fine strata classifications of preterm, term and post-term: ≥42+0 , 39+0 -41+6 (reference category), 37+0 -38+6 , 34+0 -36+6 ,34+0 -36+6 ,32+0 -33+6 , 30+0 -31+6 , 28+0 -29+6 and less than 28 weeks. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Median and interquartile ranges by study for neonatal mortality rates (NMR) and relative risks (RR). We also performed meta-analysis for the relative mortality risks with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) by the fine categories, stratified by regional study setting (sub-Saharan Africa and Southern Asia) and study-level NMR (≤25 versus >25 neonatal deaths per 1000 live births). RESULTS: We found a dose-response relationship between lower gestational ages and birthweights with increasing neonatal mortality risks. The highest NMR and RR were among preterm babies born at <28 weeks (median NMR 359.2 per 1000 live births; RR 18.0, 95% CI 8.6-37.6) and very low birthweight (462.8 per 1000 live births; RR 43.4, 95% CI 29.5-63.9). We found no statistically significant neonatal mortality risk for macrosomia (RR 1.1, 95% CI 0.6-3.0) but a statistically significant risk for all preterm babies, post-term babies (RR 1.3, 95% CI 1.1-1.5) and babies born at 370 -386 weeks (RR 1.2, 95% CI 1.0-1.4). There were no statistically significant differences by region or underlying neonatal mortality. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to tracking vulnerable newborn types, monitoring finer categories of birthweight and gestational age will allow for better understanding of the predictors, interventions and health outcomes for vulnerable newborns. It is imperative that all newborns from live births and stillbirths have an accurate recorded weight and gestational age to track maternal and neonatal health and optimise prevention and care of vulnerable newborns.