Important: The POPLINE website will retire on September 1, 2019. Click here to read about the transition.

Your search found 2 Results

  1. 1
    311327
    Peer Reviewed

    Will the new WHO growth references do more harm than good?

    Binns C; Lee M

    Lancet. 2006 Nov 25; 368(9550):1868-1869.

    Exclusive breastfeeding for 6 months is the normal way to feed all infants. The new WHO growth reference released in April, 2006, is based on breastfed infants under optimum conditions. The sample is highly selected for the factors likely to promote growth in breastfed infants, and less than 10% of those initially surveyed were included in the final study. Most mothers and health professionals are concerned about their infants' growth, particularly for the first 6 months. If they believe their infants are not growing adequately, they are more likely to introduce supplementary foods, including "top-ups" with infant formula or even switching to formula completely. "Insufficient milk" is the most common reason for the early cessation of breastfeeding and mothers often self-diagnose this on the basis of perceived slower growth. (excerpt)
    Add to my documents.
  2. 2
    182619
    Peer Reviewed

    Comparison of the efficacy of a solid ready-to-use food and a liquid, milk-based diet for the rehabilitation of severely malnourished children: a randomized trial. [Comparaison de l'efficacité d'une nourriture solide prête à l'emploi et d'un régime liquide à base de lait, en vue du rétablissement d'enfants souffrant de malnutrition grave : un essai randomisé]

    Diop EH; Dossou NI; Ndour MM; Briend A; Wade S

    American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 2003 Aug; 78(2):302-307.

    Background: The World Health Organization recommends a liquid, milk-based diet (F100) during the rehabilitation phase of the treatment of severe malnutrition. A dry, solid, ready-to-use food (RTUF) that can be eaten without adding water has been proposed to eliminate the risk of bacterial contamination from added water. The efficacies of RTUF and F100 have not been compared. Objective: The objective was to compare the efficacy of RTUF and F100 in promoting weight gain in malnourished children. Design: In an open-labeled, randomized trial, 70 severely malnourished Senegalese children aged 6–36 mo were randomly allocated to receive 3 meals containing either F100 (n = 35) or RTUF (n = 35) in addition to the local diet. The data from 30 children in each group were analyzed. Results: The mean (± SD) daily energy intake in the RTUF group was 808 ± 280 (95% CI: 703.8, 912.9) kJ·kg body wt-1·d-1, and that in the F100 group was 573 ± 201 (95% CI: 497.9, 648.7) kJ·kg body wt-1·d-1 (P < 0.001). The average weight gains in the RTUF and F100 groups were 15.6 (95% CI: 13.4, 17.8) and 10.1 (95% CI: 8.7, 11.4) g·kg body wt-1·d-1, respectively (P < 0.001). The difference in weight gain was greater in the most wasted children (P < 0.05). The average duration of rehabilitation was 17.3 (95% CI: 15.6, 19.0) d in the F100 group and was 13.4 (95% CI: 12.1, 14.7) d in the RTUF group (P < 0.001). Conclusions: This study indicated that RTUF can be used efficiently for the rehabilitation of severely malnourished children. (author's)
    Add to my documents.