3 research outputs found

    Complementary feeding at 4 versus 6 months of age for preterm infants born at less than 34 weeks of gestation: a randomised, open-label, multicentre trial

    No full text
    Summary: Background: Evidence on the optimal time to initiation of complementary feeding in preterm infants is scarce. We examined the effect of initiation of complementary feeding at 4 months versus 6 months of corrected age on weight for age at 12 months corrected age in preterm infants less than 34 weeks of gestation. Methods: In this open-label, randomised trial, we enrolled infants born at less than 34 weeks of gestation with no major malformation from three public health facilities in India. Eligible infants were tracked from birth and randomly assigned (1:1) at 4 months corrected age to receive complementary feeding at 4 months corrected age (4 month group), or continuation of milk feeding and initiation of complementary feeding at 6 months corrected age (6 month group), using computer generated randomisation schedule of variable block size, stratified by gestation (30 weeks or less, and 31–33 weeks). Iron supplementation was provided as standard. Participants and the implementation team could not be masked to group assignment, but outcome assessors were masked. Primary outcome was weight for age Z-score at 12 months corrected age (WAZ12) based on WHO Multicentre Growth Reference Study growth standards. Analyses were by intention to treat. The trial is registered with Clinical Trials Registry of India, number CTRI/2012/11/003149. Findings: Between March 20, 2013, and April 24, 2015, 403 infants were randomly assigned: 206 to receive complementary feeding from 4 months and 197 to receive complementary feeding from 6 months. 22 infants in the 4 month group (four deaths, two withdrawals, 16 lost to follow-up) and eight infants in the 6 month group (two deaths, six lost to follow-up) were excluded from analysis of primary outcome. There was no difference in WAZ12 between two groups: −1·6 (SD 1·2) in the 4 month group versus −1·6 (SD 1·3) in the 6 month group (mean difference 0·005, 95% CI −0·24 to 0·25; p=0·965). There were more hospital admissions in the 4 month group compared with the 6 month group: 2·5 episodes per 100 infant-months in the 4 month group versus 1·4 episodes per 100 infant-months in the 6 month group (incidence rate ratio 1·8, 95% CI 1·0–3·1, p=0·03). 34 (18%) of 188 infants in the 4 month group required hospital admission, compared with 18 (9%) of 192 infants in the 6 month group. Interpretation: Although there was no evidence of effect for the primary endpoint of WAZ12, the higher rate of hospital admission in the 4 month group suggests a recommendation to initiate complementary feeding at 6 months over 4 months of corrected age in infants less than 34 weeks of gestation. Funding: Indian Council of Medical Research supported the study until Nov 14, 2015. Subsequently, Shuchita Gupta's salary was supported for 2 months by an institute fellowship from All India Institute Of Medical Sciences, and a grant by Wellcome Trust thereafter

    Global Burden of Cardiovascular Diseases and Risks, 1990-2022

    No full text
    The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) is a multinational collaborative research study with >10,000 collaborators around the world. GBD generates a time series of summary measures of health, including prevalence, cause-specific mortality (CSMR), years of life lost (YLLs), years lived with disability (YLDs), and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) to provide a comprehensive view of health burden for a wide range of stakeholders including clinicians, public and private health systems, ministries of health, and other policymakers. These estimates are produced for 371 causes of death and 88 risk factors according to mutually exclusive, collectively exhaustive hierarchies of health conditions and risks. The study is led by a principal investigator and governed by a study protocol, with oversight from a Scientific Council, and an Independent Advisory Committee.1 GBD is performed in compliance with Guidelines for Accurate and Transparent Health Estimates Reporting (GATHER).2 GBD uses de-identified data, and the waiver of informed consent was reviewed and approved by the University of Washington Institutional Review Board (study number 9060). This almanac presents results for 18 cardiovascular diseases (CVD) and the CVD burden attributed to 15 risk factors (including an aggregate grouping of dietary risks) by GBD region. A summary of methods follows. Additional information can be found online at https://ghdx.healthdata.org/record/ihme-data/cvd-1990-2022, including:Funding was provided by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and the American College of Cardiology Foundation. The authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose. The contents and views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official views of the National Institutes of Health, the Department of Health and Human Services, the U.S. Government, or the affiliated institutions
    corecore