Literature DB >> 31602102

The Catch-Up Growth in Stunted Children: Analysis of First and Second India Human Development Survey Data.

Rajeev Jayalakshmi1,2, Srinivasan Kannan1.   

Abstract

CONTEXT: Change in stunting as the children grow older is rarely found in published literature. AIMS: The present paper compares the change in the prevalence of stunting among children as they grow from 0-4 years to 7-11 years. SETTINGS AND
DESIGN: The present paper is a secondary analysis of India Human Development Survey-I (IHDS-I) (2005) and IHDS-II (2012) data for Kerala. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In total, 411 children of age 0-4 years and 390 children of age 7-11 years with anthropometric measurements were included in the present study, respectively, from IHDS-I and IHDS-II. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: The statistical analyses were done using SPSS 21.0. The prevalence of stunting was estimated. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were performed using the Pearson Chi-square test.
RESULTS: The prevalence of stunting among children has been drastically reduced (50.4% to 20.3%) while growing older from 0-4 years to 7-11 years.
CONCLUSIONS: More than half of the stunted children below 5 years regained normal growth, as they grow older. Copyright:
© 2019 Indian Journal of Community Medicine.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Change in prevalence; India Human Development Survey; Kerala; stunting; under-five children

Year:  2019        PMID: 31602102      PMCID: PMC6776956          DOI: 10.4103/ijcm.IJCM_127_18

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Indian J Community Med        ISSN: 0970-0218


INTRODUCTION

Stunting is an indicator of chronic undernutrition in the early growth and development of children.[1] Stunting is defined as “the percentage of children, aged 0–59 months, whose height-for-age is below minus two standard deviations (moderate and severe stunting) and minus three standard deviations (severe stunting) from the median of the World Health Organization (WHO) Child Growth Standards.”[1] The consistently poor nutritional status of children in many states of India is a subject of discussion for many years.[2] Reports suggest that the state of Kerala, an exception in terms of better performance in human development, is also not performing when it comes to the nutritional status of children.[345] The National Nutrition Monitoring Bureau (NNMB) (2012) reported that the prevalence of stunting, underweight, and wasting among children aged between 0 and 5 years in Kerala were 27%, 24%, and 15%, respectively.[6] According to the National Family Health Survey-4 (2017), the prevalence of stunting, underweight, and wasting were 19.7%, 16.1%, and 15.7%.[7] The reduction in annual average of the three indicators since NFHS-2 (1992-93) was below 1%.[78] Even though these rates found to be the best in India, one-fifth of the children are still below the accepted levels of height gain. Nevertheless, they are higher than the “trigger levels” of 15%, 20%, and 5%, respectively, for stunting, underweight, and wasting as the per WHO.[9] The reports are showing higher prevalence of undernutrition and neonatal and infant deaths among tribal groups in Kerala.[10] The present study uses the India Human Development Surveys (IHDS) conducted in two time periods for the purpose of comparison among children. The IHDS conducted in 2005 and 2012 among the same study samples (83%), provides an advantage for comparison as in a prospective cohort study.[1112] It looked into increase or decrease in the stunting rates as the children had grown from 0–4 years to 7–11 years in Kerala.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

IHDS-I (2005) and IHDS-II (2012) conducted by the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR) with the support of National Institutes of Health. The ICPSR is a joint venture of the National Council of Applied Economic Research and the University of Maryland. Data were accessed from these two surveys for analysis.[11] IHDS-I collected data from 215,754 persons of 41,554 households in 1503 villages and 971 urban neighborhoods across India, except Lakshadweep and Andaman Nicobar Islands. In IHDS-II, 83% of the IHDS-I households were reinterviewed and 2134 new households added a fresh, constituting 215,754 persons from 42,152 households. Both the surveys followed the standard protocols for data collection.[1112] In Kerala, IHDS covered 12 out of 14 districts, except Kasaragod and Wayanad. IHDS-I collected data from 7981 participants, including 3910 males (49%) and 4071 females (51%). There were550 under-five children in the total sample, of which 411 children had anthropometric measurements done.[11] IHDS-II included 6780 participants, including 3215 males and 3565 females and out of 509 children between 7 and 11 years, 390 had anthropometric measurements. The children of age 8–11 years were categorized into below average, average, and above average by their teachers in the IHDS-II. Cognitive skills mainly short reading, writing, and arithmetic knowledge tests were also conducted.[11] The analysis was done using SPSS Statistics for Windows Version 21.0 (International Business Machines Corporation-IBM Corp., Armonk, New York). The prevalence of stunting was separately estimated for under-five children in IHDS-I and children of age 7–11 years in IHDS-II based on the Z-score of height-for-age of WHO reference population.[9] The WHO classifies stunting among children below 5 years into mild, moderate, and severe as described in Table 1.
Table 1

World Health Organization classification of stunting among children

Stunting classificationHeight for the age of the child[14]
MildBetween -1 and -2 SD from the median Z-score (of the reference population)
ModerateBetween -1 and -2 SD from the median Z-score
SevereLess than -3 SD from the median Z-score

SDs: Standard deviations, WHO: World Health Organization

World Health Organization classification of stunting among children SDs: Standard deviations, WHO: World Health Organization The caste and religion were merged as one variable. Educational status, annual household income, and annual household per capita expenditure were categorized. The poverty status was in two categories, namely, below poverty line (BPL) and above poverty line (APL) following 2005 standards.[11] Associations were analyzed using the Pearson Chi-square test and binary logistic regression. Associations with a P = 0.05 was considered as statistically significant.

RESULTS

Change in prevalence of stunting among children between India Human Development Survey-I and India Human Development Survey-II

There is a significant reduction in the prevalence of stunting among children, as they grow older from 0– 4 years to 7–11 years between two surveys [Table 2]. The combined prevalence of moderate and severe stunting was 50.4% and 20.3%, respectively, in IHDS-I and IHDS-II.
Table 2

Change in the prevalence of stunting among children between India Human Development Survey-I and India Human Development Survey-II

Age (completed years), (n)IHDS-I, n (%)Age (completed years) (n)IHDS-II, n (%)


ModerateSevereTotalModerateSevereTotal
0 (48)03 (6.3)3 (6.3)7 (90)14 (15.6)5 (5.6)19 (21.2)
1 (82)11 (13.4)35 (42.7)46 (56.1)8 (73)2 (2.7)4 (5.5)6 (8.2)
2 (98)15 (15.3)43 (43.9)58 (59.2)9 (76)9 (11.8)11 (14.5)20 (26.3)
3 (95)12 (12.6)44 (46.3)56 (58.9)10 (65)8 (12.3)6 (9.2)14 (21.5)
4 (88)12 (13.6)32 (36.4)44 (50.0)11 (86)11 (12.8)9 (10.5)20 (23.3)
Total (411)50 (12.2)157 (38.2)207 (50.4)Total (390)44 (11.3)35 (9.0)79 (20.3)

IHDS: India Human Development Survey

Change in the prevalence of stunting among children between India Human Development Survey-I and India Human Development Survey-II IHDS: India Human Development Survey

Determinants of stunting among children in India Human Development Survey-I and India Human Development Survey-II

Tables 3 and 4 depict the sociodemographic and economic determinants of stunting among children in both the surveys and Table 5 shows the results of multivariate analysis. More stunting among girls was reported in the IHDS-I, and it was high among boys in IHDS-II, but the association was not statistically significant. In both surveys, caste/religion and highest education of female adult were significantly associated with stunting in bivariate analysis. The children from the Muslim community were more vulnerable to stunting in both the surveys. The prevalence of stunting among under-five children decreased as women's education increased. However, regression analysis showed no such associations. Poverty was a significant determinant of stunting in IHDS-I, but not in IHDS-II. There was considerable increase in the annual household income and monthly per capita expenditure between the periods of two surveys. The annual household income showed significant positive association with stunting in IHDS-II, even after adjusting for other factors. Children from BPL households were found to be more stunted that those from APL households in both surveys. However, this association could not be proved in IHDS-I after adjusting for other variables.
Table 3

Sociodemographic factors and stunting among children

VariablesIHDS-2005IHDS-2012


Number of subjects (n)Prevalence of stunting among children below 5 years, n (%)PNumber of subjects (n)Prevalence of stunting among children below 5 years, n (%)P
Rural/urban
 Rural262133 (50.8)0.83812523 (18.4)0.314
 Urban14974 (49.7)26556 (21.1)
Sex
 Males230112 (48.7)0.48720848 (23.1)0.087
 Females18195 (52.5)15131 (17.0)
Caste/religion
 Forward castes5324 (45.3)0.021*406 (15.0)0.016*
 Other backward class10749 (45.8)10020 (20.0)
 Scheduled caste/scheduled tribe4121 (51.2)355 (14.3)
 Muslims12578 (62.4)15543 (27.7)
 Christians8535 (41.2)605 (8.3)
Highest education of the adult female in the household (≥21 years)
 No school education53 (60.0)0.048*22 (100.0)0.011*
 Primary school (1-4)82 (25.0)51 (20.0)
 Secondary school (5-10)242136 (56.2)21546 (21.4)
 Higher secondary (11-12)6829 (42.6)8020 (25.0)
 Graduate and above8837 (42.0)8810 (11.4)
Highest education of the adult male in the household (≥21 years)
 No school education21 (50.0)0.713*41 (25.0)0.426*
 Primary school (1-4)197 (36.8)246 (25.0)
 Secondary school (5-10)268133 (49.6)20543 (21.0)
 Higher secondary (11-12)4826 (54.2)576 (10.6)
 Graduate and above5329 (54.7)5410 (18.5)

*Fisher’s exact test. IHDS: India Human Development Survey

Table 4

Economic factors and stunting among children

VariablesNumber of subjects (n)Prevalence of stunting among children below 5 years, n (%)PNumber of subjects (n)Prevalence of stunting among children below 5 years, n (%)P
Poverty status
 Below poverty line12673 (57.9)0.043329 (28.1)0.254
 Above poverty line285134 (47.0)35870 (19.6)
Annual income of the household (Rs.)
 ≤100,000335167 (49.9)0.70411332 (28.3)0.013
 >100,0007640 (52.6)27747 (17.0)
Annual per capita consumption expenditure
 ≤15,000370191 (51.6)0.1408114 (17.3)0.536
 >15,0004116 (39.0)30965 (21.0)

IHDS: India Human Development Survey

Table 5

Determinants of stunting among children - results of multivariate analysis

Variable name20052012


Unadjusted OR (95% CI)Adjusted OR (95% CI)Unadjusted OR (95% CI)Adjusted OR (95% CI)
Rural/urban
 Rural1111
 Urban0.957 (0.640-1.431)0.821 (0.511-1.321)1.188 (0.692-2.039)0.648 (0.352-1.193)
Sex
 Males1111
 Females1.164 (0.788-1.719)1.185 (0.775-1.811)0.684 (0.414-1.132)0.695 (0.392-1.232)
Caste/religion
 Forward castes1111
 Other backward class1.021 (0.527-1.977)1.028 (0.512-2.064)1.417 (0.523-3.838)1.545 (0.530-4.5000)
 Scheduled caste1.269 (0.560-2.872)1.106 (0.466-2.624)0.944 (0.261-3.412)0.729 (0.190-2.792)
 Muslims2.005 (1.046-3.844)*1.811 (0.893-3.676)2.176 (0.853-5.550)2.078 (0.752-5.746)
 Christians0.846 (0.423-1.690)0.735 (0.354-1.526)0.515 (0.146-1.819)0.430 (0.116-1.589)
Highest education of the adult female in the household (≥21 years)
 Up to 10 years of schooling1111
 >10 years of schooling0.593 (0.397-0.887)*0.600 (0.358-1.005)**0.768 (0.463-1.274)1.107 (0.571-2.146)
Highest education of the adult male in the household (≥21 years)
 Up to 10 years of schooling1111
 >10 years of schooling0.797 (0.506-1.255)2.030 (1.148-3.589)*0.616 (0.333-1.140)0.730 (0.357-1.492)
Poverty status
 Below poverty line1111
 Above poverty line1.552 (1.016-2.370)*1.420 (0.848-2.379)0.592 (0.261-1.342)0.217 (0.058-0.812)*
Annual income of the household (Rs.)
 ≤100,0001111
 >100,0001.118 (0.679-1.840)1.392 (0.779-2.487)0.517 (0.309-0.866)*0.486 (0.256-0.921)*
Annual per capita consumption expenditure (Rs.)
 ≤15,0001111
 >15,0000.600 (0.310-1.160)0.534 (0.243-1.176)1.275 (0.674-2.412)2.022 (0.738-5.542)

*P<0.05, **P=0.052. OR: Odds ratio, CI: Confidence interval

Sociodemographic factors and stunting among children *Fisher’s exact test. IHDS: India Human Development Survey Economic factors and stunting among children IHDS: India Human Development Survey Determinants of stunting among children - results of multivariate analysis *P<0.05, **P=0.052. OR: Odds ratio, CI: Confidence interval

Cognitive development among children (8–11 years) and stunting

The children of age 8–11 years were categorized into below average, average, and above average by their teachers. Basic reading, arithmetic, and writing tests were given to children and categorized into different categories based on their performance. The present study tried to find whether there is any cognitive delay in stunted children compared to normal children and the results are shown in Table 6.
Table 6

Cognitive development among children and stunting

CategoryCognitive merit of the child, n (%)P

Below averageAverageAbove average
Stunting status
No stunting (222)4 (1.8)162 (73.0)56 (25.2)0.942
Stunting (51)1 (2.0)38 (74.5)12 (23.5)

CategoryReading skillsP

Cannot readRead lettersWordsParagraphStory

Stunting status
No stunting (215)1 (0.5)15 (7.0)36 (16.7)71 (33.0)92 (42.8)0.240*
Stunting (49)2 (4.1)2 (4.1)8 (16.3)18 (36.7)19 (38.8)

CategoryArithmetic skillsP

NumbersSubtractionsDivision

Stunting status
No stunting (214)52 (24.3)116 (54.2)46 (21.5)0.163
Stunting (49)8 (16.3)34 (69.4)7 (14.3)

CategoryWriting skillsP

Cannot write1-2 mistakesNo mistakes

Stunting status0.900*
No stunting (207)13 (6.3)76 (36.7)118 (57.0)
Stunting (47)2 (4.3)18 (38.3)27 (57.4)

*Fisher’s exact test. IHDS: India Human Development Survey

Cognitive development among children and stunting *Fisher’s exact test. IHDS: India Human Development Survey

DISCUSSION

Change in the prevalence of stunting in both surveys

As shown in the results, the prevalence of stunting had reduced from 50% to 20% in IHDS-II. This figure is also closely in agreement with NNMB-2012 stunting prevalence among children of age group 5–10 years with 23.0%.[6] It indicates that the more than half of the stunted children regained their growth in 7-year period between two surveys. This catch-up growth in the early adolescence stage has been reported by many studies across the world.[13141516] However, these findings are not generalizable, given that the socioeconomic and cultural characteristics of Kerala widely vary from rest of the country.

The determinants of stunting among children between 2005 and 2012

It has to be noted that the variables that were significantly associated with stunting in IHDS-I and IHDS-II were not the same. The prevalence of stunting among children from the rural and urban areas were almost similar in two surveys; however, in the second survey, children from urban areas were slightly more stunted than rural children. The recent NFHS survey (2015–2016) showed the same finding as children from urban areas of Kerala are more stunted than their rural counterparts (19.8% vs. 19.5%).[7] More prevalence of stunting among boys in IHDS-II could be explained by the biological reasons that the pubertal growth of girls starts at a younger age than boys, and this will help them to catch up their growth a little earlier than boys.[17] The prevalence of stunting was high among children from Muslim community in both surveys showing a comparatively slower recovery. Stunting among children from scheduled castes reduced to one-fourth of the prevalence in the first survey in 2005–14.3% in 2012. This finding is similar to that of a study from West Bengal showing children of Muslim community and scheduled caste category were more stunted.[18] Both IHDS-I and II had poor representation of scheduled tribes for making any meaningful interpretations. There is a general reduction of stunting in all strata of the society during the period from 2005 to 2012. Similar to other studies in the past, there was a significant association of stunting with education of women in IHDS-I.[1920] Although it highlights the importance of the women's role in ensuring adequate nutrition for their children, this association was not seen in IHDS-II. The most plausible reason could be that unlike in the past, most of the women are exposed to health and nutrition-related information through various sources such as Integrated Child Development Services and Accredited Social Health Activists and the revolutionary social media. Therefore, it would be better to assess the awareness among women specifically related to the health and nutrition of children rather than the number of years of schooling. It is evident that the annual income and monthly per capita consumption of almost all households had been increased over the 7 years. The number of households belonged to BPL reduced substantially. Kerala is reported to have the highest per capita income in the country and it might be reflecting in these findings.[21] The annual income showed a significant positive association with stunting proving that the increase in income reduces poverty which, in turn, contribute to optimum growth of children.[22]

CONCLUSION

The results of the present study show that children who are stunted at their younger ages may regain their growth in their later development stages, specifically during early adolescence, if provided with sufficient socioeconomic and environmental conditions to exploit this window of opportunity.

Limitations of the study

This survey did not have adequate representation from tribal children, even though they are the most vulnerable groups in the state of Kerala. IHDS-II had 83% of the original samples of IHDS-I. The authors did not do a one-to-one follow-up of children in both surveys, and therefore, the results would merit as that of a systematically done prospective cohort study.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.
  7 in total

1.  Filipino children exhibit catch-Up growth from age 2 to 12 years.

Authors:  L S Adair
Journal:  J Nutr       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 4.798

Review 2.  The measurement of puberty: a review.

Authors:  Lester Coleman; John Coleman
Journal:  J Adolesc       Date:  2002-10

3.  Women's education can improve child nutrition in India.

Authors:  V K Mishra; R D Retherford
Journal:  Natl Fam Health Surv Bull       Date:  2000-02

4.  Short but catching up: statural growth among native Amazonian Bolivian children.

Authors:  Ricardo Godoy; Colleen Nyberg; Dan T A Eisenberg; Oyunbileg Magvanjav; Eliezer Shinnar; William R Leonard; Clarence Gravlee; Victoria Reyes-García; Thomas W McDade; Tomás Huanca; Susan Tanner
Journal:  Am J Hum Biol       Date:  2010 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.937

5.  Adult education and child nutrition: the role of family and community.

Authors:  H Moestue; S Huttly
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 3.710

6.  Catch-up growth in stunted children: Definitions and predictors.

Authors:  Chris Desmond; Daniela Casale
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-12-13       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Growth recovery and faltering through early adolescence in low- and middle-income countries: Determinants and implications for cognitive development.

Authors:  Andreas Georgiadis; Liza Benny; Le Thuc Duc; Sheikh Galab; Prudhvikar Reddy; Tassew Woldehanna
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2017-02-22       Impact factor: 4.634

  7 in total
  1 in total

1.  Are early childhood stunting and catch-up growth associated with school age cognition?-Evidence from an Indian birth cohort.

Authors:  Beena Koshy; Manikandan Srinivasan; Sowmiya Gopalakrishnan; Venkata Raghava Mohan; Rebecca Scharf; Laura Murray-Kolb; Sushil John; Rachel Beulah; Jayaprakash Muliyil; Gagandeep Kang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-03-02       Impact factor: 3.240

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.