1 / 33

MannaPack™ Potato Clinical Trial

MannaPack™ Potato Clinical Trial. Wilna Oldewage-Theron PhD RD (SA) & Abdulkadir Egal PhD (PH) ‏. OUTLINE OF PRESENTATION. Introduction Background Stakeholders Methods Results Limitations Conclusions Recommendations. BACKGROUND: South Africa. 49.32 million (SSA 2009) ‏

mkilbourne
Download Presentation

MannaPack™ Potato Clinical Trial

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. MannaPack™ Potato Clinical Trial Wilna Oldewage-Theron PhD RD (SA) & Abdulkadir Egal PhD (PH)‏

  2. OUTLINE OF PRESENTATION • Introduction • Background • Stakeholders • Methods • Results • Limitations • Conclusions • Recommendations

  3. BACKGROUND: South Africa • 49.32 million (SSA 2009)‏ • 40% live in poverty • (Cunnan & Maharaj, 2000:669, SA Govt, 2001)‏ • 2.5% hungry (1.23 million people household food insecurity) (SSA 2009)‏ • 20% of SA children stunted • 33.3% iron deficiency anaemia in children and women • 45.3% children at risk of zinc deficiency • 10% of children overweight (Labadarios et al., 2008) • 16.6% HIV and AIDS prevalence (WHO Stats, 2008)‏

  4. INTRODUCTION • Diarrhea = one of the top killers of • children around the world • Solution = medication or oral rehydration fluids

  5. INTRODUCTION • FMSC - new product, MannaPack™ Potato (MPP) to provide a “first food” in response to diarrhea • Dehydrated potato granules (resistant starches)‏ • Lecithinated soy flour (protein source)‏ • Gum arabic (soluble fiber)‏ • Vitamins and minerals • Mild sweet potato flavoring • Reduce the impact of diarrhea and maintain • the gut during diarrhea and recovery.

  6. MannaPack™

  7. MAIN AIM Overall purpose of the project was to document the actual impact and acceptability of MannaPack™ to reduce the impact and support resolution of the symptom of chronic and acute diarrhea.

  8. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES • Assess the acceptability of • MannaPack™ in a setting that provides care and treatment for children with diarrhea. • Assess the impact of MannaPack™ on • the quality and quantity of acute and chronic diarrhea in a community setting.

  9. STAKEHOLDERS

  10. PROJECT METHODS • 1. Planning • Ethics approval (M080365) • Strategic participatory planning workshop with all stakeholders in South Africa (SA)‏ • Two crèches in the Vaal region identified (control group)‏ • SOS village for HIV/AIDS-affected orphans in Qwa-Qwa (experimental group). • Consent • Training of data enumerators and monitors

  11. PROJECT METHODS • 2. Measurements • Diarrhea questionnaire - baseline + 6 weekly • Sensory questionnaire – baseline and end

  12. PROJECT METHODS • 2. Measurements • Weight and height, handgrip, skin tenting • & nail blanching – baseline + 6 weeks

  13. PROJECT METHODS 3. Intervention

  14. QWA-QWA BACKGROUND • 5 people per household (hh)‏ • 89.9% of caregivers unemployed • 67.4% of partners unemployed • 59.1% of hh < R 1000 (US$133) pm • 51.0% hh food insecurity

  15. VAAL REGION BACKGROUND • 4.9 people per hh • 94.1% of caregivers unemployed • 80.1% of partners unemployed • 58.3% of hh < US$133 pm • 53.0% hh food insecurity

  16. LIMITATIONS • Questionnaires not tested for SA but for Zimbabwe only although in the same region • Diarrhea not a public health problem in • SA – small sample size • 2010 World Cup

  17. Beneficiary profile who completed the study • Children between the ages 2 to 13 years of age • Experimental group consisted of 29 girls and 32 boys with overall mean age of 6.2 years • Control group was 27 girls and 22 boys with overall mean age of 3.5 years • 2010 World Cup

  18. Variable Experimental group (n=63)‏ Control group (n=49)‏ Baseline Follow-up Significance of change between baseline and follow-up (p)‏ Baseline Follow-up Significance of change between baseline and follow-up (p)‏ Age 6.2±3.6 6.4±3.5 3.4±1.2 3.4±1.1 Weight (kg)‏ 21.9±8.8 22.2±9.1 0.002 15.07±2.54 15.06±2.56 0.444 Height (m)‏ 1.14±0.21 1.15±0.21 0.047 1.04±0.27 1.05±0.27 0.083 Skin tenting (seconds)‏ 1.0±0.0 1.0±0.0 0.145 3.0±0.6 3.2±0.6 0.133 Nail blanching (seconds)‏ 3.9±0.9 3.6±0.7 0.004 3.1±0.6 3.1±0.6 1.000 Handgrip right hand 7.5±4.2 7.4±4.1 0.400 - - Handgrip left hand 7.0±4.4 7.1±4.2 0.681 - - RESULTS

  19. Classification Girls n= (%)‏ Boys n= (%)‏ Total group n=61 (%)‏ Baseline Severely stunted 3.4 6.3 4.9 ≥-3<-2 SD Stunted 10.3 6.3 8.2 Girls n=25 (%)‏ Boys n=21 (%)‏ Total group n=46 (%)‏ At the end of the intervention (Follow-up)‏ <-3 SD Severely stunted 3.4 6.3 4.9 ≥-3<-2 SD Stunted 10.3 6.3 8.2 RESULTS: STUNTING (EXPERIMENTAL)‏

  20. Classification Girls n=27 (%)‏ Boys n=22 (%)‏ Total group n=49 (%)‏ Baseline <-3 SD Severely stunted 0 5.9 2.3 ≥-3<-2 SD Stunted 11.5 17.6 14.0 Girls n=25 (%)‏ Boys n=21 (%)‏ Total group n=46 (%)‏ At the end of the intervention (Follow-up)‏ <-3 SD Severely stunted 0 5.9 2.3 ≥-3<-2 SD Stunted 11.5 17.6 14.0 RESULTS: STUNTING (CONTROL)‏

  21. Classification Girls n=25 (%)‏ Boys n=23 (%)‏ Total group n=48 (%)‏ Baseline <-3 SD Severely underweight 0 4.5 2.1 ≥-3<-2 SD Underweight 11.5 4.5 8.3 Girls n=25 (%)‏ Boys n=21 (%)‏ Total group n=46 (%)‏ At the end of the intervention (Follow-up)‏ <-3 SD Severely underweight 0 0 0 ≥-3<-2 SD Underweight 7.7 0 4.2 RESULTS: UNDERWEIGHT (EXPERIMENTAL)‏

  22. Classification Girls n=25 (%)‏ Boys n=23 (%)‏ Total group n=48 (%)‏ Baseline <-3 SD Severely underweight 3.7 0 2.0 ≥-3<-2 SD Underweight 3.7 4.5 4.1 Girls n=25 (%)‏ Boys n=21 (%)‏ Total group n=46 (%)‏ At the end of the intervention (Follow-up)‏ <-3 SD Severely underweight 3.7 0 2.0 ≥-3<-2 SD Underweight 3.7 4.5 4.1 RESULTS: UNDERWEIGHT (CONTROL)‏

  23. DIARRHEA INCIDENCE RESULTS

  24. DIARRHEA RESULTS: NR OF STOOLS PER DAY

  25. PRODUCT ACCEPTABILITY RESULTS: APPEARANCE

  26. PRODUCT ACCEPTABILITY RESULTS: TEXTURE

  27. PRODUCT ACCEPTABILITY RESULTS: TASTE

  28. CONCLUSIONS • MannaPackT consumption results indicated a minority consuming the product for the whole week. • A significant improvement was observed for underweight after the intervention. • Impact of the MannaPackTMon the nutritional status of the experimental group very clear. • This was not observed in the control group.

  29. CONCLUSIONS • Incidence and severity of diarrhea significantly reduced in the experimental group as the study progressed. • Control group remained largely • unchanged. • MannaPackTM contributed to the • reduced incidence and prevalence of diarrhea in the experimental group.

  30. ACCEPTABILITY RESULTS • Mashed potatoes not commonly consumed by the low-income groups in South Africa. • MannaPackTM not very acceptable at baseline. • Liked the MannaPackTM towards the end of the study.

  31. RECOMMENDATIONS • MannaPackTM can be effectively used as a relief food in emergency situations where both diarrhea and/or acute food shortage exist. • Can complement the already successful commodities like CSB and WSB in the USAID title II programmes.

  32. afrika

  33. wilna@vut.ac.za abdul@vut.ac.za

More Related