| Literature DB >> 26463345 |
Maurice Mutisya1,2, Ngianga-Bakwin Kandala3,4, Moses Waithanji Ngware5,6, Caroline W Kabiru7,8.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Millions of people in low and low middle income countries suffer from extreme hunger and malnutrition. Research on the effect of food insecurity on child nutrition is concentrated in high income settings and has produced mixed results. Moreover, the existing evidence on food security and nutrition in children in low and middle income countries is either cross-sectional and/or is based primarily on rural populations. In this paper, we examine the effect of household food security status and its interaction with household wealth status on stunting among children aged between 6 and 23 months in resource-poor urban setting in Kenya.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26463345 PMCID: PMC4605131 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-015-2403-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Public Health ISSN: 1471-2458 Impact factor: 3.295
Background characteristics of the study sample at entry and levels of stunting (n = 6858)
| Characteristic | Number | Percentage | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total | Stunted | Sample | Stunted | |
| Overall | 6858 | 3349 | - | 48.83 |
| Child sex** | ||||
| Male | 3462 | 1858 | 50.48 | 53.67 |
| Female | 3396 | 1491 | 49.52 | 43.90 |
| Food security** | ||||
| Food secure | 1930 | 823 | 28.14 | 42.64 |
| Moderate | 3432 | 1708 | 50.04 | 49.77 |
| Food insecure | 1496 | 818 | 21.81 | 54.68 |
| Wealth index** | ||||
| Poorest | 2778 | 1466 | 40.51 | 52.77 |
| Middle | 2125 | 970 | 30.99 | 45.65 |
| Least poor | 1955 | 913 | 28.51 | 46.70 |
| Mother education** | ||||
| Incomplete primary/no education | 1902 | 991 | 27.73 | 52.10 |
| Completed primary | 3251 | 1621 | 47.40 | 49.86 |
| Secondary plus | 1705 | 737 | 24.86 | 43.23 |
| Birth weight** | ||||
| Below 2500 | 346 | 166 | 5.05 | 47.98 |
| 2500 - 2900 | 1007 | 548 | 14.68 | 54.42 |
| = > 3000 | 3817 | 1795 | 55.66 | 47.03 |
| No birth weight record | 1688 | 840 | 24.61 | 49.76 |
| Breast feeding | ||||
| Yes | 72 | 41 | 1.05 | 56.94 |
| Introduced to foods | 6786 | 3308 | 98.95 | 48.75 |
| Parity* | ||||
| 1 | 2097 | 962 | 30.58 | 45.88 |
| 2 | 2016 | 982 | 29.40 | 48.71 |
| 3 | 1227 | 606 | 17.89 | 49.39 |
| 4 | 683 | 346 | 9.96 | 50.66 |
| 5 plus | 835 | 453 | 12.18 | 54.25 |
| Study site** | ||||
| Korogocho | 3613 | 1894 | 52.68 | 52.42 |
| Viwandani | 3245 | 1455 | 47.32 | 44.84 |
| HHH Education** | ||||
| No education | 291 | 151 | 4.24 | 51.89 |
| Primary | 4172 | 2117 | 60.83 | 50.74 |
| Secondary & above | 2393 | 1081 | 34.92 | 45.14 |
| HHH sex | ||||
| Female | 1606 | 797 | 23.42 | 49.63 |
| Male | 5225 | 2552 | 76.58 | 48.59 |
| Mean mother agea | 6558 | 25.04 (5.92) | 24.73(5.86) | |
| Mean HHH agea | 6558 | 34.49 (9.65) | 33.92 (9.63) | |
| Average HH sizea | 6558 | 4.67 (1.98) | 4.64 (1.90) | |
Significant at * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01 when testing difference in the proportion of children stunted by each variables; HH = Household; HHH = HH head; aMean and standard deviations reported
Proportion of stunted children by food security status and asset wealth index at the point of stunting
| Number | % of sample | % stunted |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Poorest - overall | 2815 | 41.0 | 52.50 | 0.26 |
| Food secure | 469 | 20.2 | 49.5 | |
| Moderate | 1572 | 94.9 | 52.5 | |
| Food insecure | 774 | 26.9 | 54.3 | |
| Middle poor - overall | 2072 | 30.2 | 46.04 | 0.01 |
| Food secure | 554 | 23.9 | 40.8 | |
| Moderate | 1009 | 60.9 | 46.6 | |
| Food insecure | 509 | 17.7 | 50.7 | |
| Least poor - overall | 1971 | 28.7 | 46.52 | 0.08 |
| Food secure | 926 | 39.9 | 44.3 | |
| Moderate | 859 | 51.8 | 47.6 | |
| Food insecure | 186 | 6.5 | 52.7 |
Fig. 1Food security and wealth status Kaplan Meir survival curves
Fig. 2Cox regression survival curve on hazards of stunting
Bivariate and multiple Cox regression hazard ratio on stunting (n = 6858)
| Variable | M1: Bivariate | M2: Adjusted for WI | M3: Other covariates | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR | 95 % CI | HR | 95 % CI | HR | 95 % CI | ||||
| Food security | |||||||||
| Food secure | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||||||
| Moderate | 1.16** | 1.07 | 1.26 | 1.15** | 1.05 | 1.25 | 1.12** | 1.02 | 1.22 |
| Food insecure | 1.23** | 1.11 | 1.35 | 1.21** | 1.09 | 1.33 | 1.15* | 1.03 | 1.28 |
| Wealth index | |||||||||
| Poorest | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||||||
| Middle | 0.86** | 0.79 | 0.93 | 0.87** | 0.80 | 0.94 | 0.82** | 1.02 | 1.22 |
| Least poor | 0.89** | 0.82 | 0.96 | 0.93 | 0.86 | 1.02 | 0.79* | 1.03 | 1.28 |
| Study site | |||||||||
| Korogocho | 1 | 1 | |||||||
| Viwandani | 0.85** | 0.79 | 0.91 | 0.95 | 0.86 | 1.04 | |||
| Child sex | |||||||||
| Male | 1 | 1 | |||||||
| Female | 0.80** | 0.75 | 0.85 | 0.80** | 0.75 | 0.86 | |||
WI = Wealth index; Model 1 (M1): Bivariate association; Model 2 (M2): Includes both food security and asset wealth index; Model 3 (M3): Includes model 2 and controls for other covariates: Mother and child characteristics (Age at birth, education level, parity at birth, breastfeeding, birth weight) and Household characteristics (head education, sex, age and size)
Significant at * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01
Fig. 3Interacting effect of household food security and wealth index on child stunting