Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Food‐Based Interventions on Recovery from Moderate Acute Malnutrition in Young Children

Abstract

Background and ObjectiveThe rationale of this systematic review was to examine the comparative effectiveness of lipid‐based nutrient supplements (LNS) versus fortified blended foods (FBF) in treatment of moderate acute malnutrition (MAM).Data sourcesAll published articles identified though MEDLINE® and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, from inception to July 2012.Study selectionReviewers independently selected eligible comparative studies of children under 5 with MAM. Interventions were broadly categorized as FBF or LNS.Data extractionArticle information was extracted using a standardized protocol into predesigned forms and reviewed for accuracy.Results34 out of 12,453 screened articles were accepted. Interventions ranged 8 to 16 wks. Meta‐analysis of 5 studies showed a 10% lesser recovery rate from MAM in children treated with FBF as compared with LNS (RR=0.9, 95% CI 0.8,1.01; 79.6% LNS vs 77.5% FBF). This indicates that for every 48 children that are treated with FBF rather than LNS, one child will not recover from moderate malnutrition.ConclusionsLNS is associated with a higher rate of recovery from MAM when compared with FBF. The studies on children with MAM are heterogeneous leading to dilution of comparative effect. The clinical relevance of outcomes as well as cost‐effectiveness need to be taken into consideration when interpreting the results.