A field trial of wheat-based oral rehydration solution among Afghan refugee children

Delivering nutrition interventions to women and children in conflict settings: a systematic review

Background

Low/middle-income countries (LMICs) face triple burden of malnutrition associated with infectious diseases, and non-communicable diseases. This review aims to synthesise the available data on the delivery, coverage, and effectiveness of the nutrition programmes for conflict affected women and children living in LMICs.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycINFO databases and grey literature using terms related to conflict, population, and nutrition. We searched studies on women and children receiving nutrition-specific interventions during or within five years of a conflict in LMICs. We extracted information on population, intervention, and delivery characteristics, as well as delivery barriers and facilitators. Data on intervention coverage and effectiveness were tabulated, but no meta-analysis was conducted.

Results

Ninety-one pubblications met our inclusion criteria. Nearly half of the publications (n=43) included population of sub-Saharan Africa (n=31) followed by Middle East and North African region. Most publications (n=58) reported on interventions targeting children under 5 years of age, and pregnant and lactating women (n=27). General food distribution (n=34), micronutrient supplementation (n=27) and nutrition assessment (n=26) were the most frequently reported interventions, with most reporting on intervention delivery to refugee populations in camp settings (n=63) and using community-based approaches. Only eight studies reported on coverage and effectiveness of intervention. Key delivery facilitators included community advocacy and social mobilisation, effective monitoring and the integration of nutrition, and other sectoral interventions and services, and barriers included insufficient resources, nutritional commodity shortages, security concerns, poor reporting, limited cooperation, and difficulty accessing and following-up of beneficiaries.

Discussion

Despite the focus on nutrition in conflict settings, our review highlights important information gaps. Moreover, there is very little information on coverage or effectiveness of nutrition interventions; more rigorous evaluation of effectiveness and delivery approaches is needed, including outside of camps and for preventive as well as curative nutrition interventions.

PROSPERO registration number

CRD42019125221.

Polymer-based oral rehydration solution for treating acute watery diarrhoea

BACKGROUND

Acute diarrhoea is one of the main causes of morbidity and mortality among children in low-income countries. Glucose-based oral rehydration solution (ORS) helps replace fluid and prevent further dehydration from acute diarrhoea. Since 2004, the World Health Organization (WHO) has recommended the osmolarity of less than 270 mOsm/L (ORS ≤ 270) versus greater than 310 mOsm/L formulation (ORS ≥ 310). Polymer-based ORS (for example, prepared using rice or wheat) slowly releases glucose and may be superior to glucose-based ORS.

OBJECTIVES

To compare polymer-based oral rehydration solution (polymer-based ORS) with glucose-based oral rehydration solution (glucose-based ORS) for treating acute watery diarrhoea.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following sources up to 5 September 2016: the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group (CIDG) Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library 2016, Issue 9), MEDLINE (1966 to 5 September 2016), EMBASE (1974 to 5 September 2016), LILACS (1982 to 5 September 2016), and mRCT (2007 to 5 September 2016). We also contacted researchers, organizations, and pharmaceutical companies, and searched reference lists.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of people with acute watery diarrhoea (cholera and non-cholera associated) that compared polymer-based and glucose-based ORS (with identical electrolyte contents).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the search results and risk of bias, and extracted data. In multiple-treatment arms with two or more treatment groups, we combined outcomes as appropriate and compared collectively with the control group.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-five trials that included 4284 participants met the inclusion criteria: 28 trials exclusively included children, five included adults, and two included both adults and children. Polymer-based ORS versus glucose-based ORS (osmolarity ≤ 270) Eight trials (752 participants) evaluated this comparison, and seven trials used rice as a polymer source. Polymer-based ORS may decrease mean stool output in the first 24 hours by 24 mL/kg (mean difference (MD) -24.60 mL/kg, 95% CI -40.69 to -8.51; one trial, 99 participants, low quality evidence). The average duration of diarrhoea may be reduced by eight hours (MD -8.24 hours, 95% CI -13.17 to -3.30; I² statistic = 86%, five trials, 364 participants, low quality evidence) with polymer ORS but results are heterogeneous. Limited trials showed no observed difference in the risk of unscheduled use of intravenous fluid (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.02; I² statistic = 30%; four trials, 376 participants, very low quality evidence), vomiting (very low quality evidence), and hyponatraemia (very low quality evidence). Polymer-based ORS versus glucose-based ORS (osmolarity ≥ 310) Twenty-seven trials (3532 participants) evaluated this comparison using a variety of polymers. On average, polymer ORS may reduce the total stool output in the first 24 hours by around 65 mL/kg (MD -65.47 mL/kg, 95% CI -83.92 to -47.03; 16 trials, 1483 participants, low quality evidence), and may reduce the duration of diarrhoea by around eight hours (MD -8.57 hours; SD -13.17 to -4.03; 16 trials, 1137 participants, low quality evidence) with substantial heterogeneity. The proportion of participants that required intravenous hydration was low in most trials with fewer in the polymer ORS group (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.98; 19 trials, 1877 participant, low quality evidence) . Subgroup analysis by type of pathogen suggested an effect on unscheduled intravenous fluid in those infected with mixed pathogens (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.96; 11 trials, 928 participants, low quality evidence), but not in participants positive for Vibrio cholerae (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.34; 7 trials, 535 participants, low quality evidence). No difference was observed in the number of patients who developed vomiting (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.14; 10 trials, 584 participants, very low quality evidence), hyponatraemia (RR 1.82, 95% CI 0.52 to 6.44; 4 trials, 385 participants, very low quality evidence), hypokalaemia (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.74 to 2.25; 2 trials, 260 participants, low quality evidence), or persistent diarrhoea (RR 1.28, 95% CI 0.68 to 2.41; 2 trials, 885 participants, very low quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Polymer-based ORS shows advantages compared to glucose-based ORS (at ≥ 310 mOsm/L). Comparisons favoured polymer-based ORS over ORS ≤ 270 but analysis was underpowered.

Polymer-based oral rehydration solution for treating acute watery diarrhoea

BACKGROUND

Acute diarrhoea is one of the principal causes of morbidity and mortality among children in low-income countries. Glucose-based ORS helps replace fluid and prevent further dehydration from acute diarrhoea. Since 2004, the World Health Organization has recommended the osmolarity < 270 mOsm/L (ORS </= 270 ) over the > 310 mOsm/L formulation (ORS >/= 310). Glucose polymer-based ORS (eg prepared using rice or wheat) slowly releases glucose and may be superior.

OBJECTIVES

To compare polymer-based ORS with glucose-based ORS for treating acute watery diarrhoea.

SEARCH STRATEGY

In September 2008, we searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2008, Issue 3), MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, and mRCT. We also contacted researchers, organizations, and pharmaceutical companies, and searched reference lists.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials of people with acute watery diarrhoea (cholera and non-cholera associated) comparing polymer-based and glucose-based ORS (with identical electrolyte contents).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed the search results and risk of bias, and extracted data. In multiple treatment arms with two or more treatment groups, we combined outcomes as appropriate and compared collectively with the control group.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-four trials involving 4214 participants met the inclusion criteria: 27 in children, five in adults and two in both. Twelve trials used adequate methods to conceal allocation. Most compared polymer-based ORS with ORS >/= 310. There were fewer unscheduled intravenous infusions in the polymer-based ORS group compared with glucose-based ORS (ORS >/= 310 and </= 270 groups combined) (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.95; 2235 participants, 19 trials). Adults positive for Vibrio cholerae had a shorter duration of diarrhoea with polymer-based ORS than with ORS </= 270 (MD -7.11 hours, SD -11.91 to -2.32; 228 participants, 4 trials). Wheat-based ORS resulted in lower total stool output in the first 24 hours compared with ORS </= 270 (MD -119.85 g/kg, SD -114.73 to -124.97; 129 participants, 2 trials). Adverse effects were similar for polymer-based ORS and glucose-based ORS.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Polymer-based ORS shows some advantages compared to ORS >/= 310 for treating all-cause diarrhoea, and in diarrhoea caused by cholera. Comparisons favoured the polymer-based ORS over ORS </= 270, but the analysis was underpowered. If specialists consider a potential role for polymer-based ORS, further trials against the current standard (ORS </= 270) will be required.

Nutritional effects and management of diarrhoea in infancy

The interactions between diarrhoeal disease and nutritional status are complex and synergistic. These are serious issues globally because they affect hundreds of millions of young children and annually cause > 3 million deaths in children aged under 5 y. Despite intensive field-based and laboratory studies over three decades, many questions remain unanswered about the causes, pathophysiology and best approaches to management and prevention of this "diarrhoea-malnutrition" syndrome. Oral rehydration therapy (ORT) has been a major advance and has saved many lives from acute diarrhoea. However, persistent diarrhoea is now a major problem and is very significant because of its strong negative impacts on nutritional status and because persistent diarrhoea and dysentery are now major causes of infant and young child deaths. ORT provides clear and practical methods for replacement of fluid and electrolyte losses during diarrhoea. Rehydration salts can be made available as (i) a simple, easy-to-use package, complete with user instructions; (ii) cereal-based formulae based on widely available ingredients that can be prepared domestically or commercially; and (iii) home-made mixtures of sugar and salt which should be simple to prepare but are risky because of inadequate understanding about their preparation at home and the chance of mixing the ingredients inaccurately and giving them wrongly. Continuation and encouragement of breastfeeding is an important strategy to prevent and control diarrhoea and as part of its management. Early refeeding during diarrhoea is another important principle to help to reduce its duration, severity and its nutritional impacts. Supplementation with specific dietary ingredients, such as vitamin A, zinc and folate, is rather contentious and drug therapy is of little value unless specifically indicated. Some patients may require enteral nutrition or parenteral nutrition but these require specialized equipment and skills that are usually beyond the reach of developing countries and infants and children who live in remote areas.

Nutritional management of acute diarrhea

Despite recommendations from several bodies such as the World Health Organization and others that feeding should be continued during diarrhea, the practice of withholding food during the early stages of diarrhea is still widespread. This contributes to a deterioration in patients' nutritional state. The principal controversy in the nutritional therapy of acute gastroenteritis centers on the relative risks of cows'-milk feeds. The two things that need to be considered in determining the optimum approach to feeding the child with acute diarrhea are the optimum timing for feeding children in relation to the onset of and recovery from symptoms and, secondly, the effects of specific food ingredients in the diet. Recent studies have demonstrated that the vast majority of young children with acute diarrhea can be successfully managed with continued feeding of undiluted non-human milk. Routine dilution of milk and routine use of lactose-free formula are not necessary, especially when oral rehydration therapy and early feeding (in addition to milk) form the basic approach to the clinical management of diarrhea in children. Confounding factors are the severity of the diarrhea, coexistent malnutrition, and young age (< 1 y); such infants are much more likely to have complications from early feeding with undiluted milk and some would advocate use of specifically designed lactose-free formula in such children. Children who are fed exclusively with human milk and those who receive solid foods with or without human milk may safely continue to receive their usual diets during diarrhea. Those who are fed exclusively with non-human milk--especially when very young and with severe diarrhea or malnutrition--should be closely observed if they continue to consume milk or they should receive a special formulation (e.g., a cereal-milk mixture or fermented milk product). The use of nutrient-dense mixtures of common foods may be advisable to promote compensatory growth in those who lose weight during illness or because of anorexia or malabsorption.