| Literature DB >> 22259239 |
Paluku Bahwere1, Hedwig Deconinck, Theresa Banda, Angella Mtimuni, Steve Collins.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The role of household food security (HFS) in the occurrence of wasting and the response to food-based intervention in people living with human immunodeficiency virus (PLHIV), especially adults, is still controversial and needs investigation.Entities:
Keywords: HIV; antiretroviral; chronically sick; food security; malnutrition; ready-to-use therapeutic food
Year: 2011 PMID: 22259239 PMCID: PMC3259077 DOI: 10.2147/PPA.S25672
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Patient Prefer Adherence ISSN: 1177-889X Impact factor: 2.711
Description of individual coping strategy and weighting
| Coping strategies | Frequency | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| Eating less preferred food | 0–2 | 1.75 |
| Reduce number of meals | 0–2 | 2.75 |
| Borrowing food | 0–2 | 2.75 |
| Reducing portion size | 0–2 | 3.25 |
| Purchasing food on credit | 0–2 | 3.25 |
| Skipping the entire day without eating | 0–2 | 4.00 |
Note: 0 = almost every day, 1 = sometimes, 2 = never.
Nutritional status, hemoglobin, and CD4 count at enrolment according to the Coping Strategies Index tertile
| Variables | n | Mean (SD) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Weight (kg) | |||
| ≥ 30.0 | 60 | 41.9 (6.9) | |
| 22.75–<30.0 | 58 | 40.5 (6.2) | 0.468 |
| <22.75 | 62 | 40.8 (6.8) | |
| Body mass index (kg/m2) | |||
| ≥ 30.0 | 59 | 16.7 (2.0) | |
| 22.75–<30.0 | 57 | 16.2 (1.8) | 0.406 |
| <22.75 | 65 | 16.2 (1.9) | |
| MUAC (mm) | |||
| ≥ 30.0 | 63 | 197.8 (18.8) | |
| 22.75–<30.0 | 58 | 195.2 (18.3) | 0.727 |
| <22.75 | 64 | 197.3 (19.6) | |
| Hemoglobin (g/dL) | |||
| ≥ 30.0 | 54 | 8.6 (1.8) | |
| 22.75–<30.0 | 53 | 8.6 (2.1) | 0.706 |
| <22.75 | 58 | 8.9 (2.1) | |
| CD4 count (cells/μL) | |||
| ≥ 30.0 | 48 | 158.0 (104.5–337.0) | |
| 22.75–<30.0 | 50 | 124.5 (76.5–309.2) | 0.593 |
| <22.75 | 56 | 167.0 (98.7–397.7) | |
Abbreviations: IQR, interquartile range; MUAC, mid-upper arm circumference; SD, standard deviation.
Figure 1Coping Strategy Index (CSI) score at admission and follow up visits.
Note: Red bars show 95% confidence interval.
Figure 2Proportion of wasted adults in the households of the participants according to Coping Strategy Index category.
Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; CSI, Coping Strategy Index; MUAC, mid-upper arm circumference.
Nutrition and immunity changes of participants enrolled in the program in relation to the Coping Strategies Index tertiles
| Coping Strategies Index categories | All | Not yet on ART | Started ART | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | Median (IQR) | n | Median (IQR) | n | Median (IQR) | ||||
| Weight gain at discharge (kg) | |||||||||
| Middle and best tertiles: ≥22.75 | 76 | 3.3 (−1.7 to 6.9) | 0.058 | 49 | 2.1 (−2.0 to 6.8) | 0.145 | 27 | 5.1 (1.6 to 7.2) | 0.681 |
| Worst tertile: <22.75 | 41 | 0.0 (−1.7 to 3.4) | 29 | −0.1 (−1.9 to 1.2) | 12 | 3.6 (−1.3 to 9.4) | |||
| BMI gain at discharge (kg/m2) | |||||||||
| Middle and best tertiles: ≥22.75 | 76 | 1.2 (−0.6 to 2.6) | 0.046 | 49 | 0.6 (−0.7 to 2.5) | 0.132 | 27 | 1.9 (0.6 to 2.7) | 0.626 |
| Worst tertile: <22.75 | 41 | 0.0 (−0.7 to 1.5) | 29 | 0.0 (−0.9 to 0.4) | 12 | 1.2 (−0.4 to 3.3) | |||
| MUAC gain at discharge (mm) | |||||||||
| Middle and best tertiles: ≥22.75 | 76 | 22.0 (−0.7 to 36.0) | 0.119 | 49 | 14.0 (−9.0 to 35.5) | 0.313 | 27 | 24.0 (14.0 to 38.0) | 0.563 |
| Worst tertile: <22.75 | 41 | 10.0 (−3.0 to 25.0) | 29 | 7.0 (−5.0 to 19.0) | 12 | 22.5 (5.5 to 35.2) | |||
| Hemoglobin gain at discharge (g/dL) | |||||||||
| Middle and best tertiles: ≥22.75 | 65 | 0.75 (−0.6 to 2.3) | 0.128 | 45 | 0.5 (−0.5 to 2.7) | 0.153 | 21 | 1.2 (−1.1 to 2.1) | 0.475 |
| Worst tertile: <22.75 | 36 | 0.37 (−1.0 to 1.4) | 25 | 0.2 (−1.1 to 1.4) | 11 | 0.4 (−0.8 to 1.8) | |||
| CD4 count gain at discharge (cells/μL) | |||||||||
| Middle and best tertiles: ≥22.75 | 49 | 43.0 (−20.0 to 127.0) | 0.595 | 33 | 9.0 (−29.0 to 88.0) | 0.718 | 16 | 100.0 (−42.0 to 183.7) | 0.692 |
| Worst tertile: <22.75 | 23 | 26.0 (−90.0 to 132.0) | 14 | 6.0 (−96.5 to 63.0) | 9 | 89.0 (−51.5 to 213.5) | |||
Abbreviations: ART, antiretroviral therapy; BMI, body mass index; IQR, interquartile range; MUAC, mid-upper arm circumference; SD, standard deviation.
Weight gain after discontinuation of CS-RUTF supplementation according to the food security condition at enrolment
| Coping Strategy Index categories | n | Follow-up duration after stopping CS-RUTF supplementation (days) | Weight change after stopping CS-RUTF supplementation(kg) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean (SD) | Mean (IQR) | ||||
| All participants | |||||
| ≥ 22.75 | 47 | 338.5 (117.1) | 0.860 | 1.8 (−1.4 to 4.7) | 0.098 |
| < 22.75 | 21 | 332.8 (138.6) | −1.9 (−5.2 to 4.2) | ||
| Never started ART | |||||
| ≥ 22.75 | 20 | 312.9 (140.6) | 0.595 | 1.1 (−3.5 to 3.1) | 0.006 |
| < 22.75 | 8 | 343.0 (112.3) | −5.2 (−7.5 to −1.9) | ||
| Ever started ART | |||||
| ≥ 22.75 | 27 | 357.5 (94.5) | 0.520 | 3.3 (−9.0 to 5.1) | 0.874 |
| < 22.75 | 13 | 326.5 (156.8) | 3.0 (−3.2 to 5.4) | ||
Abbreviations: ART, antiretroviral therapy; CS-RUTF, chickpea sesame-based ready-to-use therapeutic food; IQR, interquartile range.