| Literature DB >> 35111842 |
Dewi Marhaeni Diah Herawati1, Deni Kurniadi Sunjaya2, Lailia Fathul Janah3, Nita Arisanti2, Hadi Susiarno4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Anaemia in pregnancy is a major global health problem. Iron and folic acid (IFAS) and animal-based supplement consumption could improve the hemoglobin status of pregnant women. This study is aimed at determining the effect of eel cookie supplementation on hemoglobin levels of pregnant women.Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35111842 PMCID: PMC8803467 DOI: 10.1155/2022/3919613
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Food Sci ISSN: 2314-5765
Figure 1Flow diagram.
Comparison of eel cookies and cookies without eel composition/100 g.
| Parameter | Eel cookies | Cookies without eel |
|---|---|---|
| Energy (kcal) | 349.1 | 320 |
| Carbohydrate (g) | 30.2 | 45 |
| Fats (g) | 20.7 | 12 |
| Protein (g) | 10.5 | 8 |
| Iron (mg/ppm) | 33 | 17 |
| Vitamin A (mcg) | 793.3 | 258 |
Comparison of demographic characteristics of intervention and control groups.
| No. | Variable | Groups |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention ( | Control ( | |||
| 1. | Pregnancy risk | 0.288∗ | ||
| Low risk | 13 | 16 | ||
| High risk | 7 | 4 | ||
| 2. | Parity | 0.240∗ | ||
| Primipara | 4 | 7 | ||
| Multipara | 14 | 13 | ||
| Grande multipara | 2 | 0 | ||
| 3. | Mother's education | 0.786∗ | ||
| Elementary school | 9 | 8 | ||
| Junior high school | 8 | 10 | ||
| Senior high school | 3 | 2 | ||
| 4. | Mother's occupation | 1.000∗∗ | ||
| Unemployed | 18 | 19 | ||
| Employed | 2 | 1 | ||
| 5. | Husband's education | 0.762∗ | ||
| Elementary school | 9 | 10 | ||
| Junior high school | 5 | 6 | ||
| Senior high school | 6 | 4 | ||
| 6. | Husband's occupation | 0.461∗ | ||
| Civil servant/teachers | 0 | 2 | ||
| Private employees | 2 | 3 | ||
| Entrepreneurs | 11 | 10 | ||
| Farmer/laborer | 7 | 5 | ||
| 7. | Family income | 0.809∗ | ||
| <1 million | 6 | 5 | ||
| 1-3 million | 13 | 13 | ||
| >3-5 million | 1 | 2 | ||
| 8. | History of antenatal care | |||
| 1st trimester | 1 (1-3)∗ | 2 (0-4) | 0.277∗ | |
| 2nd trimester | 3 (1-5)∗ | 3 (1-4) | 0.989∗ | |
| 3rd trimester | 0 (0-2)∗ | 1 (0-5) | 0.301 ∗∗∗ | |
Data are expressed as median and range; ∗chi-square; ∗∗Fisher; ∗∗∗Mann-Whitney; significance level applied at p < 0.05.
Comparison of anthropometric measurements in both groups.
| No. | Variable | Groups |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention ( | Control ( | |||
| 1. | BW pre (kg) | 55.2 (10.4) ∗ | 54.51 (11.31) | 0.841∗∗ |
| 2. | BW post (kg) | 61.8 (9.8)∗ | 61.23 (12.01) | 0.873∗∗ |
| 3. | MUAC pre (cm) | 24.7 (2.04)∗ | 25.6 (3.39) | 0.698∗∗∗ |
| 4. | MUAC post (cm) | 26.7 (1.8)∗ | 26.7 (3.83) | 0.231∗∗∗ |
| 5. | Height (cm) | 154.6 (4.8)∗ | 154.4 (4.7) | 0.894∗∗ |
| 6. | BMI pre | 23.06 (3.9)∗ | 22.92 (4.94) | 0.718∗∗∗ |
| 7. | BMI post | 25.8 (3.6)∗ | 25.7 (4.96) | 0.926∗∗∗ |
∗Data are expressed as the mean and standard deviation; ∗∗t-test; ∗∗∗Mann-Whitney; significance level applied at p < 0.05.
Vitamin A, protein, iron, vitamin C, calorie, and energy intake in both groups.
| No. | Variable | Groups |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention ( | Control ( | |||
| 1. | Vitamin A | |||
| Pretest | 777 (231–3093) | 789 (256-1500) | 0.355∗∗∗ | |
| Posttest | 900 (355-2685) | 1002 (351-1639) | 0.841∗∗∗ | |
| 2. | Vitamin C | |||
| Pretest | 27.7 (6-187.5) | 39.05 (1.80-257.4) | 0.738∗∗∗ | |
| Posttest | 29.5 (2.50-97) | 29.3 (5.05-111.6) | 0.779∗∗∗ | |
| 3 | Iron | |||
| Pretest | 8.4 (3.4-18) | 8.50 (2.0-76.10) | 0.738∗∗∗ | |
| Posttest | 15.5 (4.6-54) | 10.7 (4.90-22.70) | 0.096∗∗∗ | |
| 4 | Calorie | |||
| Pretest | 1264 (659-3543) | 1373 (854-2956) | 0.947∗∗ | |
| Posttest | 1399.5 (857-2220) | 1464.5 (981-2141) | 0.921∗∗ | |
| 5 | Protein | |||
| Pretest | 48.50 (25-96) | 34.50 (23-90) | 0.76∗∗ | |
| Posttest | 58.50 (38-87) | 42.50 (26-90) | 0.028∗∗ | |
Data are expressed as median and range; ∗∗independent t-test; ∗∗∗Mann-Whitney; significance level applied at p < 0.05.
Compliance rate of IFAS and cookie consumption in both groups (%).
| Cookie consumption | Groups | |
|---|---|---|
| Intervention ( | Control ( | |
| Not consumed | - | - |
| 1–3 pieces | - | - |
| 4–5 pieces | - | 18% |
| 6–7 pieces | - | - |
| 8–10 pieces | 14% | - |
| 11 pieces | 86% | 82% |
| IFAS consumption | 92% | 92% |
Comparison of hemoglobin levels in both groups.
| No. | Hb (g/dL) | Groups |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention ( | Control ( | |||
| 1. | Pretest | |||
|
| 9.98 (0.63) | 10.64 (0.23) | 0.001∗∗ | |
| Median | 10.2 | 10.7 | ||
| Range | 8.3-10.7 | 10.2-10.9 | ||
| 2. | Posttest | 0.019∗ | ||
|
| 11.67 (0.52) | 11.33 (0.35) | ||
| Median | 11.75 | 11.3 | ||
| Range | 10.5-13.00 | 10.9-12.0 | ||
|
|
|
| ||
| % mean Hb changes | 17.21% | 6.53% | <0.001∗ | |
| After adjusted protein intake | 17.26% | 6.49% | <0.001∗∗∗∗ | |
Data are expressed as mean (X) and standard deviation (SD) and median and range; ∗t-test; ∗∗Mann-Whitney; ∗∗∗Wilcoxon; ∗∗∗∗ANCOVA; significance level applied at p < 0.05.
Figure 2Changes in the percentage of mean of hemoglobin in both groups.