Validation of a Simple Stool Diary Used by Caregivers to Document Diarrhea Among Young Children in a Low-Income Country

Evaluations of water, sanitation and hygiene interventions should not use diarrhoea as (primary) outcome

Water, sanitation and hygiene interventions have been the subject of cluster trials of unprecedented size, scale and cost in recent years. However, the question 'what works in water, sanitation, hygiene (WASH)?' remains poorly understood. Evaluations of community interventions to prevent infectious disease typically use lab-confirmed infection as a primary outcome; however, WASH trials mostly use reported diarrhoea. While diarrhoea is a significant source of morbidity, it is subjected to significant misclassification error with respect to enteric infection due to the existence of non-infectious diarrhoea and asymptomatic infection. We show how this may lead to bias of estimated effects of interventions from WASH trials towards no effect. The problem is further compounded by other biases in the measurement process. Alongside testing for infection of the gut, an examination of the causal assumptions underlying WASH interventions present several other reliable alternative and complementary measurements and outcomes. Contemporary guidance on the evaluation of complex interventions requires researchers to take a broad view of the causal effects of an intervention across a system. Reported diarrhoea can fail to even be a reliable measure of changes to gastrointestinal health and so should not be used as a primary outcome if we are to progress our knowledge of what works in WASH.

Diarrhea, Dehydration, and the Associated Mortality in Children with Complicated Severe Acute Malnutrition: A Prospective Cohort Study in Uganda

OBJECTIVE

To assess predictors of diarrhea and dehydration and to investigate the role of diarrhea in mortality among children with complicated severe acute malnutrition.

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective cohort study, nested in a probiotic trial, was conducted in children with complicated severe acute malnutrition. Children were treated according to World Health Organization and national guidelines, and diarrhea and dehydration were assessed daily. Multiple linear and log-linear Poisson regression models were used to identify predictors of days with diarrhea and dehydration, respectively, and multiple logistic regression was used to assess their role in mortality.

RESULTS

Among 400 children enrolled, the median (IQR) age was 15.0 months (11.2-19.2 months), 58% were boys, and 61% had caregiver-reported diarrhea at admission. During hospitalization, the median (range) number of days with diarrhea was 5 (0-31), the median duration of hospitalization was 17 days (1-69 days), and 39 (10%) died. Of 592 diarrhea episodes monitored, 237 were admission episodes and 355 were hospital acquired. During hospitalization, young age was associated with days with diarrhea, and young age and HIV infection were associated with dehydration. Both days with diarrhea and dehydration predicted duration of hospitalization as well as mortality. The odds of mortality increased by a factor of 1.4 (95% CI, 1.2-1.6) per day of diarrhea and 3.5 (95% CI, 2.2-6.0) per unit increase in dehydration score.

CONCLUSIONS

Diarrhea is a strong predictor of mortality among children with complicated severe acute malnutrition. Improved management of diarrhea and prevention of hospital-acquired diarrhea may be critical to decreasing mortality.

The Role of Probiotics in the Treatment of Dysentery: a Randomized Double-Blind Clinical Trial

Diarrhea is considered as an important cause of morbidity and mortality, even though one of the main reasons of death following diarrhea is initiated by dysentery. In recent years, the consumption of probiotics has been proposed for the treatment of infectious diarrhea. Despite most of the studies on probiotics have focused on acute watery diarrhea, few studies in the field of dysentery have found beneficial effects of probiotics. This study is a randomized double-blind clinical trial. The patients were randomly placed into control and case groups. In the intervention group, the patients received probiotics in the form of Kidilact® sachet, which contained high amounts of 7-strain friendly bacteria strains of Lactobacillus casei, Lactobacillus acidophilus, Lactobacillus rhamnosus, Lactobacillus bulgaricus, Bifidobacterium infantis, Bifidobacterium breve, and Streptococcus thermophiles. On the other hand, the patients in the control group received placebo sachets on a daily basis for 5 days. It is notable that the treatment protocol of acute dysentery was done on both groups. The results of this study showed significant differences in the duration of blood in diarrhea between probiotic consumers (2.62 days) and the control group (3.16 days) (P value = 0.05). Additionally, significant differences in the average length of hospitalization in probiotic consumers (3.16 days) and control (3.66 days), (P value = 0.02) could be claimed that the consumption of probiotics is effective in reducing the duration of dysentery and diarrhea. The results of this study suggest that the use of probiotics can be effective in reducing the duration of blood in diarrhea. This study was also recorded in the Iran center of clinical trials registration database (IRCT2014060617985N1).

Stool frequency recording in severe acute malnutrition ('StoolSAM'); an agreement study comparing maternal recall versus direct observation using diapers

BACKGROUND

Approximately 50% of the deaths of children under the age of 5 can be attributed to undernutrition, which also encompasses severe acute malnutrition (SAM). Diarrhoea is strongly associated with these deaths and is commonly diagnosed solely based on stool frequency and consistency obtained through maternal recall. This trial aims to determine whether this approach is equivalent to a 'directly observed method' in which a health care worker directly observed stool frequency using diapers in hospitalised children with complicated SAM.

METHODS

This study was conducted at 'Moyo' Nutritional Rehabilitation Unit, Queen Elizabeth Central Hospital, Malawi. Participants were children aged 5-59 months admitted with SAM. We compared 2 days of stool frequency data obtained with next-day maternal-recall versus a 'gold standard' in which a health care worker observed stool frequency every 2 h using diapers. After study completion, guardians were asked their preferred method and their level of education.

RESULTS

We found poor agreement between maternal recall and the 'gold standard' of directly observed diapers. The sensitivity to detect diarrhoea based on maternal recall was poor, with only 75 and 56% of diarrhoea cases identified on days 1 and 2, respectively. However, the specificity was higher with more than 80% of children correctly classified as not having diarrhoea. On day 1, the mean stool frequency difference between the two methods was -0.17 (SD; 1.68) with limits of agreement (of stool frequency) of -3.55 and 3.20 and, similarly on day 2, the mean difference was -0.2 (SD; 1.59) with limits of agreement of -3.38 and 2.98. These limits extend beyond the pre-specified 'acceptable' limits of agreement (±1.5 stool per day) and indicate that the 2 methods are non-equivalent. The higher the stool frequency, the more discrepant the two methods were. Most primary care givers strongly preferred using diapers.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows lack of agreement between the assessment of stool frequency in SAM patients using maternal recall and direct observation of diapers. When designing studies, one should consider using diapers to determining diarrhoea incidence/prevalence in SAM patients especially when accuracy is essential.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN11571116 (registered 29/11/2013).