TY - JOUR
T1 - Treatment of severe acute malnutrition with oat or standard ready-to-use therapeutic food
T2 - A triple-blind, randomised controlled clinical trial
AU - Hendrixson, David Taylor
AU - Godbout, Claire
AU - Los, Alyssa
AU - Callaghan-Gillespie, Meghan
AU - Mui, Melody
AU - Wegner, Donna
AU - Bryant, Taylor
AU - Koroma, Aminata
AU - Manary, Mark J.
N1 - Funding Information:
Contributors DTh and MJM wrote the first draft of the manuscript. DTh, DW and Mc-g provided direct field supervision of the trial. cg and al performed daily data collection in the field. MJM, DW, MM and TB developed and prepared the rUTF. aK, DTh, Mc-g and MJM developed the trial protocol. DTh, aK and MJM selected the sites. MJM and aK provided overall administrative direction for the trial. MJM is the guarantor of the trial and data. MJM affirms that the manuscript is an honest, accurate and transparent account of the study being reported; that no important aspects of the study have been omitted; and that any discrepancies from the study as planned have been explained. Funding children’s investment Fund Foundation funded this trial with an award to MM and Washington University. Competing interests DTh, MJM, cg, al, DW, Mc-g and MM report grants from children’s investment Fund Foundation paid to their university.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 BMJ Publishing Group. All rights reserved.
PY - 2020/12/1
Y1 - 2020/12/1
N2 - Objective We hypothesised that an alternative RUTF (ready-to-use therapeutic food) made with oats (oat-RUTF) would be non-inferior to standard RUTF (s-RUTF). Design This was a randomised, triple-blind, controlled, clinical non-inferiority trial comparing oat-RUTF to s-RUTF in rural Sierra Leone. Children aged 6-59 months with severe acute malnutrition (SAM) were randomised to oat-RUTF or s-RUTF. s-RUTF was composed of milk powder, sugar, peanut paste and vegetable oil, with a hydrogenated vegetable oil additive. Oat-RUTF contained oats and no hydrogenated vegetable oil additives. The primary outcome was graduation, an increase in anthropometric measurements such that the child was not acutely malnourished. Secondary outcomes were rates of growth, time to graduation and presence of adverse events. Intention to treat analyses was used. Results Of the 1406 children were enrolled, graduation was attained in 404/721 (56%) children receiving oat-RUTF and 311/685 (45%) receiving s-RUTF (difference 10.6%, 95% CI 5.4% to 15.8%). Death, hospitalisation or remaining with SAM was seen in 87/721 (12%) receiving oat-RUTF and in 125/685 (18%) receiving s-RUTF (difference 6.2%, 95% CI 2.3 to 10.0, p=0.001). Time to graduation was less for children receiving oat RUTF; 3.9±1.8 versus 4.5±1.8 visits, respectively (p<0.001). Rates of weight in the oat-RUTF group were greater than in the s-RUTF group; 3.4±2.7 versus 2.5±2.3 g/kg/d, p<0.001. Conclusion Oat-RUTF is superior to s-RUTF in the treatment of SAM in Sierra Leone. We speculate that might be because of beneficial bioactive components or the absence of hydrogenated vegetable oil in oat-RUTF. Trial registration number NCT03407326.
AB - Objective We hypothesised that an alternative RUTF (ready-to-use therapeutic food) made with oats (oat-RUTF) would be non-inferior to standard RUTF (s-RUTF). Design This was a randomised, triple-blind, controlled, clinical non-inferiority trial comparing oat-RUTF to s-RUTF in rural Sierra Leone. Children aged 6-59 months with severe acute malnutrition (SAM) were randomised to oat-RUTF or s-RUTF. s-RUTF was composed of milk powder, sugar, peanut paste and vegetable oil, with a hydrogenated vegetable oil additive. Oat-RUTF contained oats and no hydrogenated vegetable oil additives. The primary outcome was graduation, an increase in anthropometric measurements such that the child was not acutely malnourished. Secondary outcomes were rates of growth, time to graduation and presence of adverse events. Intention to treat analyses was used. Results Of the 1406 children were enrolled, graduation was attained in 404/721 (56%) children receiving oat-RUTF and 311/685 (45%) receiving s-RUTF (difference 10.6%, 95% CI 5.4% to 15.8%). Death, hospitalisation or remaining with SAM was seen in 87/721 (12%) receiving oat-RUTF and in 125/685 (18%) receiving s-RUTF (difference 6.2%, 95% CI 2.3 to 10.0, p=0.001). Time to graduation was less for children receiving oat RUTF; 3.9±1.8 versus 4.5±1.8 visits, respectively (p<0.001). Rates of weight in the oat-RUTF group were greater than in the s-RUTF group; 3.4±2.7 versus 2.5±2.3 g/kg/d, p<0.001. Conclusion Oat-RUTF is superior to s-RUTF in the treatment of SAM in Sierra Leone. We speculate that might be because of beneficial bioactive components or the absence of hydrogenated vegetable oil in oat-RUTF. Trial registration number NCT03407326.
KW - diet
KW - malnutrition
KW - nutrition in paediatrics
KW - nutritional supplementation
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85082725695&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1136/gutjnl-2020-320769
DO - 10.1136/gutjnl-2020-320769
M3 - Article
C2 - 32179568
AN - SCOPUS:85082725695
VL - 69
SP - 2143
EP - 2149
JO - Gut
JF - Gut
SN - 0017-5749
IS - 12
ER -