High Coverage and Low Utilization of the Double Fortified Salt Program in Uttar Pradesh, India: Implications for Program Implementation and Evaluation

Introducing double fortified salt in social safety net programmes in Madhya Pradesh and Gujarat in India: Success factors, challenges and lessons learned

Double fortified salt (DFS; with iron and iodine) was introduced in social safety net programmes (SSNPs) in Madhya Pradesh (MP) and Gujarat states in 2018. Nutrition International (NI) provided critical support for the intervention. An impact evaluation in MP found high DFS uptake, exceeding 90%. Conduct a process evaluation of the DFS programmes in MP and Gujarat states to identify success factors, challenges, and recommend considerations for scale-up. Twenty-eight qualitative interviews were conducted with NI staff, national and state level government officials, and DFS producers in 2022. Enabling environmental factors included national-level support for food fortification, consensus that anaemia was essential to address, and institutional trust in NI for technical assistance. In programme implementation, the primary challenges were reports of black specks in DFS and the darkening of food cooked with DFS. NI supported the government in improving handling practices, ensuring a regular and stable supply, introducing quality monitoring efforts and launching targeted behaviour change communication (BCC) campaigns regarding the value of DFS. Long-term implementation of the programmes is a weak point, as DFS production is more expensive than iodised salt, there is no existing market outside of institutional demand, and BCC must be long-term, high-quality, and requires resourcing for continued high uptake among SSNP beneficiaries. Strong government buy-in and technical support along the supply chain to address quality issues and beneficiary acceptance were key factors for the successful introduction of DFS. Comparative studies of DFS programmes should be conducted to improve confidence in the success factors that lead to high DFS uptake.

A proposed method for defining the required fortification level of micronutrients in foods: An example using iron

In 2006, the WHO published a framework for calculating the desired level of fortification of any micronutrient in any staple food vehicle, to reduce micronutrient malnutrition. This framework set the target median nutrient intake, of the population consuming the fortified food, at the 97.5th percentile of their nutrient requirement distribution; the Probability of Inadequacy (PIA) of the nutrient would then be 2.5%. We argue here that the targeted median nutrient intake should be at Estimated Average Requirement (50^th percentile), since the intake distribution will then overlap the requirement distribution in a population that is in homeostasis, resulting in a PIA of 50%. It is also important to recognize that setting the target PIA at 2.5% may put a sizable proportion at risk of adverse consequences associated with exceeding the tolerable upper limit (TUL) of intake. This is a critical departure from the WHO framework. For a population with different age- and sex-groups, the pragmatic way to fix the fortification level for a staple food vehicle is by achieving a target PIA of 50% in the most deprived age- or sex-group of that population, subject to the condition that only a very small proportion of intakes exceed the TUL. The methods described here will aid precision in public health nutrition, to pragmatically determine the precise fortification level of a nutrient in a food vehicle, while balancing risks of inadequacy and excess intake.

Fortification of salt with iron and iodine versus fortification of salt with iodine alone for improving iron and iodine status

BACKGROUND

Iron deficiency is an important micronutrient deficiency contributing to the global burden of disease, and particularly affects children, premenopausal women, and people in low-resource settings. Anaemia is a possible consequence of iron deficiency, although clinical and functional manifestations of anemia can occur without iron deficiency (e.g. from other nutritional deficiencies, inflammation, and parasitic infections). Direct nutritional interventions, such as large-scale food fortification, can improve micronutrient status, especially in vulnerable populations. Given the highly successful delivery of iodine through salt iodisation, fortifying salt with iodine and iron has been proposed as a method for preventing iron deficiency anaemia. Further investigation of the effect of double-fortified salt (i.e. with iron and iodine) on iron deficiency and related outcomes is warranted.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of double-fortified salt (DFS) compared to iodised salt (IS) on measures of iron and iodine status in all age groups.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, five other databases, and two trial registries up to April 2021. We also searched relevant websites, reference lists, and contacted the authors of included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All prospective randomised controlled trials (RCTs), including cluster-randomised controlled trials (cRCTs), and controlled before-after (CBA) studies, comparing DFS with IS on measures of iron and iodine status were eligible, irrespective of language or publication status. Study reports published as abstracts were also eligible.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors applied the study selection criteria, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Two review authors rated the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. When necessary, we contacted study authors for additional information. We assessed RCTs, cRCTs and CBA studies using the Cochrane RoB 1 tool and Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) tool across the following domains: random sequence generation; allocation concealment; blinding of participants and personnel; blinding of outcome assessment; incomplete outcome data; selective reporting; and other potential sources of bias due to similar baseline characteristics, similar baseline outcome assessments, and declarations of conflicts of interest and funding sources. We also assessed cRCTs for recruitment bias, baseline imbalance, loss of clusters, incorrect analysis, and comparability with individually randomised studies. We assigned studies an overall risk of bias judgement (low risk, high risk, or unclear).  MAIN RESULTS: We included 18 studies (7 RCTs, 7 cRCTs, 4 CBA studies), involving over 8800 individuals from five countries. One study did not contribute to analyses. All studies used IS as the comparator and measured and reported outcomes at study endpoint.  With regards to risk of bias, five RCTs had unclear risk of bias, with some concerns in random sequence generation and allocation concealment, while we assessed two RCTs to have a high risk of bias overall, whereby high risk was noted in at least one or more domain(s). Of the seven cRCTs, we assessed six at high risk of bias overall, with one or more domain(s) judged as high risk and one cRCT had an unclear risk of bias with concerns around allocation and blinding. The four CBA studies had high or unclear risk of bias for most domains. The RCT evidence suggested that, compared to IS, DFS may slightly improve haemoglobin concentration (mean difference (MD) 0.43 g/dL, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.23 to 0.63; 13 studies, 4564 participants; low-certainty evidence), but DFS may reduce urinary iodine concentration compared to IS (MD -96.86 μg/L, 95% CI -164.99 to -28.73; 7 studies, 1594 participants; low-certainty evidence), although both salts increased mean urinary iodine concentration above the cut-off deficiency. For CBA studies, we found DFS made no difference in haemoglobin concentration (MD 0.26 g/dL, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.63; 4 studies, 1397 participants) or urinary iodine concentration (MD -17.27 µg/L, 95% CI -49.27 to 14.73; 3 studies, 1127 participants). No studies measured blood pressure. For secondary outcomes reported in RCTs, DFS may result in little to no difference in ferritin concentration (MD -3.94 µg/L, 95% CI -20.65 to 12.77; 5 studies, 1419 participants; low-certainty evidence) or transferrin receptor concentration (MD -4.68 mg/L, 95% CI -11.67 to 2.31; 5 studies, 1256 participants; low-certainty evidence) compared to IS. However, DFS may reduce zinc protoporphyrin concentration (MD -27.26 µmol/mol, 95% CI -47.49 to -7.03; 3 studies, 921 participants; low-certainty evidence) and result in a slight increase in body iron stores (MD 1.77 mg/kg, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.74; 4 studies, 847 participants; low-certainty evidence). In terms of prevalence of anaemia, DFS may reduce the risk of anaemia by 21% (risk ratio (RR) 0.79, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.94; P = 0.007; 8 studies, 2593 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Likewise, DFS may reduce the risk of iron deficiency anaemia by 65% (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.52; 5 studies, 1209 participants; low-certainty evidence).  Four studies measured salt intake at endline, although only one study reported this for both groups. Two studies reported prevalence of goitre, while one CBA study measured and reported serum iron concentration. One study reported adverse effects. No studies measured hepcidin concentration.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest DFS may have a small positive impact on haemoglobin concentration and the prevalence of anaemia compared to IS, particularly when considering efficacy studies. Future research should prioritise studies that incorporate robust study designs and outcome measures (e.g. anaemia, iron status measures) to better understand the effect of DFS provision to a free-living population (non-research population), where there could be an added cost to purchase double-fortified salt. Adequately measuring salt intake, both at baseline and endline, and adjusting for inflammation will be important to understanding the true effect on measures of iron status.

The Role of Multiply-Fortified Table Salt and Bouillon in Food Systems Transformation

Our global food system lacks the critically needed micronutrients to meet the daily requirements of the most at-risk populations. Diets also continue to shift toward unhealthy foods, including the increased intake of salt. While most countries exceed the WHO’s recommended levels, sodium does play an essential physiological role. Table salt and other salt-containing condiments, such as bouillon, also have cultural importance, as they are used to enhance the flavor of foods cooked at home. Given their universal consumption across income classes and both urban and rural populations, these condiments are an integral part of the food system and should, therefore, be part of its transformation. Fortification of salt and salt-containing condiments can play a catalytic role in the delivery of population-wide nutritional and health benefits. With relatively consistent levels of intake across the population, these condiments hold high potential for delivering micronutrients beyond iodine while also reducing concerns related to high micronutrient intake, particularly so in countries where the industries are relatively consolidated. As a flexible and complementary strategy to an evolving food system, fortification levels can also be adjusted over time to ensure micronutrient delivery targets continue to be achieved as the system improves, whether through lower intakes of sodium in line with WHO recommendations, enhanced consumption of nutrient-dense foods, and/or broader adoption of biofortified crops. Future areas of innovation are required to realize this vision, including developing affordable salt substitutes to meet cost requirements of consumers in low-and middle-income countries, improving the stability and bioavailability of the micronutrients in condiments so that delivery targets can be reached without affecting sensory attributes, and the development of efficient systems for monitoring population intake and micronutrient status to inform fortification program design and management. Rather than being considered antithetical to the transformation, multiply-fortified salt and bouillon can strengthen our ability to meet the cultural, sensory, nutritional, and health needs of an evolving food system.

Making programmes worth their salt: Assessing the context, fidelity and outcomes of implementation of the double fortified salt programme in Uttar Pradesh, India

Double fortified salt (DFS) has proven efficacy in addressing iron deficiency and anaemia, thus improving maternal and child nutrition outcomes. However, DFS delivery in large‐scale settings is less understood, with limited documentation of its fidelity of implementation (FOI). We assessed the FOI of the DFS intervention in Uttar Pradesh, India, to improve the design and implementation of such programmes that aim to reduce the anaemia burden, especially in women of reproductive age (WRA). We conducted in‐depth interviews with DFS programme staff (n = 25) and end‐user WRAs (23), guided by a programme impact pathway. We transcribed and thematically analysed the interviews and used an adapted analytic framework to document FOI across four domains—objects of intervention, implementation staff, implementation context and target of implementation. DFS utilisation remained low due to a combination of factors including poor product quality, distribution challenges, ineffective promotion and low awareness amongst end‐user WRAs. Motivation levels were higher amongst district‐level staff compared to frontline staff, who lacked supervisory support and effective incentives to promote DFS. Three typologies of DFS users emerged—‘believers’, ‘thrifters’ and ‘naysayers’—who indicated differing reasons for DFS purchase and its use or nonuse. The implementation of the DFS programme varied significantly from its theorised programme impact pathway. The adapted analytic framework helped document FOI and assess the programme's readiness for impact assessments and subsequent scale‐up. The programme needs product quality improvements, incentivised distribution and stronger promotion to effectively deliver and improve the realisation of its potential as an anaemia prevention strategy.

The Impact of Double-Fortified Salt Delivered Through the Public Distribution System on Iodine Status in Women of Reproductive Age in Rural India

BACKGROUND

Double-fortified salt (DFS) with iron and iodine has been demonstrated to be efficacious but questions of unintended effects on the gains in salt iodization remain. The main cross-sectional study based on the use of DFS over 1 y showed a reduction in iron deficiency risk. Whether the programs and the levels of added iron can adversely affect iodine status is yet to be established.

OBJECTIVES

We hypothesized that the addition of iron to iodized salt can adversely affect iodine status in women of reproductive age (WRA).

METHODS

A cross-sectional substudy was conducted in 4 matched-pair adjacent districts of rural Uttar Pradesh, India, in 2019. Under the public distribution system (PDS), DFS was available for 1 y through Fair Price Shops, in the 2 DFS supply districts (DFS-SDs). In these districts, iodized salt was also available in the market. In the 2 compared DFS nonsupply districts (DFS-NSDs), only iodized salt was available. In the substudy, participants included WRA (n = 1624) residing in rural areas of the selected districts. Iodine content in urine and salt samples was measured in each of the groups.

RESULTS

Significantly fewer women from the DFS-SDs had median urinary iodine concentration values indicative of moderate to mild iodine deficiency compared with the women from the DFS-NSDs. The salt purchase pattern and iodine content revealed that significantly fewer (21.99%) households in the DFS-SDs were purchasing inadequately iodized crystal salt, compared with 36.04% households in the DFS-NSDs.

CONCLUSIONS

The data reject the working hypothesis and suggest a beneficial effect of the DFS program on the iodine status in WRA, thereby supporting a recommendation of DFS supply through the PDS.